Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.image.processing > #4550

Re: my take on Kodak downfall

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On 19/05/2021 22:21, nospam wrote:
> In article <s83s98$edf$4@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
> <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Kodak PCD digital scanning service was well ahead of the game at one
>> point
> 
> hah, pcd was never ahead of anything. it was dead from the start.

It was very good at the time it was first introduced. You don't known 
what you are talking about so you must be the real Dale.
> 
>> and Bryce Bayer one shot colour mask designer worked for Kodak.
> 
> long ago, yes. he invented what is now known as the bayer mask.
> 
>> I recall the Kodak transition to digital cameras as an early adopter. I
>> got a massively discounted DC-120 1Mpixel camera "remaindered" when they
>> launched the confusingly named DC-210 a couple of months later.
> 
> 120 and 210 confuse you? seriously???

It confused the hell out of their UK *dealers* who immediately 
remaindered the older model. I benefited nicely from their confusion.

> were you confused that canon had a d30 and 30d?
> or that canon and nikon both had a d60?
> or maybe that canon had a 300d and nikon had a d300?
> 
> or that linksys had a wrt54g and wtr54g router?
> 
> or that asus has a 68u and 86u wifi router?
> 
>> Kodak marketing department really knew how to shoot themselves in the
>> foot with both barrels. Almost as bad as IBM with the PS/2 OS/2 debacle.
> 
> that was *very* different in many ways.
> 
> everyone, including kodak, knew that digital was going to make film
> obsolete.

They did fuck all about it though. Digital photography development was 
deliberately held back to protect the lucrative wet chemistry film 
market. They badly misjudged how long they had remaining.

I had abandoned Kodak film for the much better Fuji film by then anyway 
and I suspect I was not alone in doing that.

> the problem was that kodak's management was incredibly stupid and
> thought it would take much longer than it actually did.
> 
> it also didn't help that kodak's digital cameras were not competitive,
> with the most convoluted user interface anyone could possibly have come
> up with. i remember having to dig through 4-5 levels of menus to be
> able to change the shutter speed. clearly a design by committee and not
> by actual users. instant fail.
> 
> a better comparison would be with blackberry, which was once the most
> popular smartphone.
> 
> when rim/blackberry first saw the iphone, they didn't think it would
> amount to much, further confirmed by seeing their sales go up for a
> year or two, only to be hit with reality.
> 
> everyone else saw the iphone train coming. they didn't.
> 
> even google knew the iphone was the future. android was originally
> going to be a blackberry clone, and when they saw the iphone, they
> immediately shifted gears and copied the iphone instead.
> 
> <http://allthingsd.com/files/2011/11/Android_before_after_iphone.png>

They were not alone - Polaroid committed suicide in much the same way.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

Back to sci.image.processing | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: my take on Kodak downfall Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2021-05-19 14:29 -0400
  Re: my take on Kodak downfall Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2021-05-19 12:46 -0700
    Re: my take on Kodak downfall Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> - 2021-05-19 21:26 +0100
      Re: my take on Kodak downfall nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-05-19 17:21 -0400
        Re: my take on Kodak downfall Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> - 2021-05-20 08:45 +0100

csiph-web