Monito wrote:
The reason? "Effort" does not come free of charge. You would scream if you had to pay Zeiss prices for your Canon gear.
Edited by Monito on Mar 05, 2008 at 08:21 PM GMT
You don't understand quality systems. Canon will save money by raising their quality standards. It isn't a matter of inspecting for quality, it is a matter of building quality. World class companies are aware of this. I wish you could see some of the examples that I have seen of companies that have turned their quality around. The savings in rework, return shipments, etc.. far outweigh the costs of building product right the first time.
Mark Zwiesler wrote:
You don't understand quality systems. Canon will save money by raising their quality standards. It isn't a matter of inspecting for quality, it is a matter of building quality. World class companies are aware of this. I wish you could see some of the examples that I have seen of companies that have turned their quality around. The savings in rework, return shipments, etc.. far outweigh the costs of building product right the first time.
Mark
Two Thumbs up for that response-absolutely true. Inspection is not a means to achieving good quality.
Mark Zwiesler wrote:
You don't understand quality systems. Canon will save money by raising their quality standards. It isn't a matter of inspecting for quality, it is a matter of building quality. World class companies are aware of this. I wish you could see some of the examples that I have seen of companies that have turned their quality around. The savings in rework, return shipments, etc.. far outweigh the costs of building product right the first time.
You can raise a strawman and shoot it down. I never suggested that inspection was the solution.
Canon is a world class company. Canon is more aware of building quality than you are, since they have been building it for years, not just observing it from a distance. They are more aware than you are of the cost savings. They have business models and quantified it.
Canon had a problem with the 1D3, but it is clear that it was intermittent and hard for both the users and the company to track down. These are sophisticated products at the frontiers of performance and users are demanding ever greater performance.
Pick any product and any manufacturer. There are forums for it and people on them complaining loudly and frequently that the manufacturer has lousy quality control.
I don't measure quality control by counting soapboxes with squeaky wheels on top of them with bullhorns.
Do any of you remember the gold oval stickers on camera gear from Japan? I think it's been a good 15 or so years since it's been utilized. It was a national standards group (Japanese Camera Inspection Institute) that verified every piece of equipment before shipment out of the country. It was part of an initiative to make sure quality was at a high level in order to address complaints about the quality of Japanese products. (China has gone through the same thing with complaints about manufacturing standards).
Since the JCII organization was disbanded they have lacked the extra layer of validation, so now each company is left to its own management standards.
