Prev: Insane, paranoid Brits STILL at it.
Next: Picture Album Support System
From: Peter on 13 Jul 2010 14:06
"John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:i1i7eh$qph$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
> Bruce wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 05:31:32 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
>>> Bruce opined:
>
>>>> Otherwise, just the usual pointless whining rant. What is it with you
>>>> Canadians that you just cannot stop whining, eh?
>
>>> What is it with Americans that they constantly demand cost-cutting and
>>> cheapness, even if it harms quality?
>>
>>
>> Being neither Canadian nor American, I cannot give you a definitive
>> answer. But what is certain is that these are consumer-grade cameras
>> that sell to consumers, not to professional or hobbyist photographers,
>> except as a second camera. In that market. affordability (for the
>> buyer) and profitability (for the manufacturer and the supply chain)
>> are far more important than ultimate quality.
>>
>> So expect to see more cameras made in China, more lenses with a
>> plastic mount, and more success for companies who make and sell
>> products that millions of people (and not just Americans) can afford
>> to buy.
>
> It'd be swell if derogatory comments could be saved for Serbs or Ghanans,
> there being none on these NGs I've seen. There are enough twits in the US,
> GB, Aus, Canada, France and Scandanavia, etc. that one can make any
> derogatory point about any nation. It's uncouth so to do. Pointless, to
> boot.


Not pointless. My guess is making negative comments about any group
satisfies some inner ego need.


--
Peter

From: Bruce on 13 Jul 2010 15:47
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:54:04 -0500, Rich <none(a)nowhere.com> wrote:
>Panasonic, a company that has done nearly no wrong, who have basically made
>mirrorless cameras acceptable (thanks to the fastest contrast focus speed
>going) and who stuck to a decent level of construction for their cameras
>have dropped the ball. They shifted production of their cameras to China,
>cheapened the product (G2), cheapened and made WORSE the lens (14-45mm
>Japanese kit lens morphs into a crappy Chinese 14-42mm with worse optics
>and a plastic lens mount)and all they added did was add consumer-friendly
>video to the product. On top of that, they made no improvements in
>processing or sensor in over 2 years.


Those who believe that Japan is a country that thrives on high
technology, high quality products - and by implication, that China is
less advanced and delivers lower quality products, should read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10543126.stm

From: Rich on 13 Jul 2010 15:56
On Jul 13, 3:47 pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:54:04 -0500, Rich <n...(a)nowhere.com> wrote:
> >Panasonic, a company that has done nearly no wrong, who have basically made
> >mirrorless cameras acceptable (thanks to the fastest contrast focus speed
> >going) and who stuck to a decent level of construction for their cameras
> >have dropped the ball. They shifted production of their cameras to China,
> >cheapened the product (G2), cheapened and made WORSE the lens (14-45mm
> >Japanese kit lens morphs into a crappy Chinese 14-42mm with worse optics
> >and a plastic lens mount)and all they added did was add consumer-friendly
> >video to the product.  On top of that, they made no improvements in
> >processing or sensor in over 2 years.  
>
> Those who believe that Japan is a country that thrives on high
> technology, high quality products - and by implication, that China is
> less advanced and delivers lower quality products, should read this:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10543126.stm

Not the same argument. Mine had to do with the overall cheapening of
products at the expense of quality. Japan has a law that says they
can't export garbage to their trading partners, it's been in place
since the 1970s. But this does not apply to stuff they build in
China.
From: Rich on 13 Jul 2010 16:03
On Jul 13, 1:23 pm, John McWilliams <jp...(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 05:31:32 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com>
> >> Bruce opined:
> >>> Otherwise, just the usual pointless whining rant.  What is it with you
> >>> Canadians that you just cannot stop whining, eh?
> >> What is it with Americans that they constantly demand cost-cutting and
> >> cheapness, even if it harms quality?
>
> > Being neither Canadian nor American, I cannot give you a definitive
> > answer.  But what is certain is that these are consumer-grade cameras
> > that sell to consumers, not to professional or hobbyist photographers,
> > except as a second camera.  In that market. affordability (for the
> > buyer) and profitability (for the manufacturer and the supply chain)
> > are far more important than ultimate quality.
>
> > So expect to see more cameras made in China, more lenses with a
> > plastic mount, and more success for companies who make and sell
> > products that millions of people (and not just Americans) can afford
> > to buy.
>
> It'd be swell if derogatory comments could be saved for Serbs or
> Ghanans, there being none on these NGs I've seen. There are enough twits
> in the US, GB, Aus, Canada, France and Scandanavia, etc. that one can
> make any derogatory point about any nation. It's uncouth so to do.
> Pointless, to boot.
>
> --
> john mcwilliams

It's a sociological observation and accurate, based on the fact
Walmart, responsible for the degradation of countless formerly good
products (read the Rubbermaid story) is by far the largest company in
the U.S. in-terms of income.
From: RichA on 14 Jul 2010 13:11
On Jul 13, 9:04 pm, krishnananda <kris...(a)divine-life.in.invalid>
wrote:
> In article
> <7e69a458-4669-4732-9069-0a1f04df2...(a)b29g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>  Rich <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 13, 1:23 pm, John McWilliams <jp...(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> > > Bruce wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 05:31:32 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com>
> > > >> Bruce opined:
> > > >>> Otherwise, just the usual pointless whining rant.  What is it with you
> > > >>> Canadians that you just cannot stop whining, eh?
> > > >> What is it with Americans that they constantly demand cost-cutting and
> > > >> cheapness, even if it harms quality?
>
> > > > Being neither Canadian nor American, I cannot give you a definitive
> > > > answer.  But what is certain is that these are consumer-grade cameras
> > > > that sell to consumers, not to professional or hobbyist photographers,
> > > > except as a second camera.  In that market. affordability (for the
> > > > buyer) and profitability (for the manufacturer and the supply chain)
> > > > are far more important than ultimate quality.
>
> > > > So expect to see more cameras made in China, more lenses with a
> > > > plastic mount, and more success for companies who make and sell
> > > > products that millions of people (and not just Americans) can afford
> > > > to buy.
>
> > > It'd be swell if derogatory comments could be saved for Serbs or
> > > Ghanans, there being none on these NGs I've seen. There are enough twits
> > > in the US, GB, Aus, Canada, France and Scandanavia, etc. that one can
> > > make any derogatory point about any nation. It's uncouth so to do.
> > > Pointless, to boot.
>
> > > --
> > > john mcwilliams
>
> > It's a sociological observation and accurate, based on the fact
> > Walmart, responsible for the degradation of countless formerly good
> > products (read the Rubbermaid story) is by far the largest company in
> > the U.S. in-terms of income.
>
> "Rubbermaid raised the prices it charged Wal-Mart in the mid-1990s
> because of an 80% jump in the cost of a key ingredient in its plastic
> containers. The retailer responded by giving more shelf space to
> lower-priced competitors, helping drive Rubbermaid into a 1999 merger
> with rival Newell"
> <http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation
> _x.htm>
>
> Is there some law that requires retailers to purchase products from
> suppliers if the retailer believes the price is too high?
>
> Apparently some other plastic company could make the same stuff for
> less. Big deal. B&H Photo also sells for less and makes unreasonable
> demands on camera manufacturers. Is B&H therefore evil?

Clueless. Same stuff? NO, that is the problem. B&H sells for
"less?" Uh, no, not since I've known them.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Insane, paranoid Brits STILL at it.
Next: Picture Album Support System