pookipichu wrote:
I got a really bad feeling when I heard that and started posting all sorts of things in forums trying to wake them up. That sort of talk from execs usually happens a few years before a company gets hit with a rude awakening.
Your fault. Why didnīt you fly over, told them their incompetence and charged them for 750.000 $?
Others did an get payed, I am sure. For them it is peanuts.
Do you really think they decided themselfs to stay at actual sensor power?
They where told they are world leader. And that their gear misses reliability and focus competence in the midrange compared to competitors. The result we have NOW. A great camera. But overcome i resolution and DR by Nikon. What do you think what the same guys told them 3 years ago?
\"You have great stuff, but you are wide behind the standard. You are still lucky, because you have a bride established base. But you have to giv them what your competitors offer, better something large over it. Nikon did not think about the needs of their customers. They just created something new for the future like Canon did with 5D II. Canon instead thought about users complaines, but not one step further.
All succesfull companies in the last 100 years stuck in their success and killed themselfs by feeling responsible for their stockholders not for their products and users.
That is the only cause why new companies like red start succesfull in a market they have never been in before.
Without Jobs (and I do not like him) apple will be down within a decade (they already have been and cryed for help), if they do not change this way of management.
pookipichu wrote:
I got a really bad feeling when I heard that and started posting all sorts of things in forums trying to wake them up. That sort of talk from execs usually happens a few years before a company gets hit with a rude awakening.
Your fault. Why didnīt you fly over, tell them their incompetence and charced them for 750.000 $?
Others did an get payed, I am sure. For them it is peanuts.
Do you really think they decided themselfs to stay at actual sensor power?
They where told they are world leader. And that their gear misses reliability and focus competence in the midrange compared to competitors. The result we have NOW. A great camera. But overcome i resolution and DR by Nikon. What do you think what the same guys told them 3 years ago?
\"You have great stuff, but you are wide behind the standard. You are still lucky, because you have a bride established base. But you have to giv them what your competitors offer, better something large over it. Nikon did not think about the needs of their customers. They just created something new for the future like Canon did with 5D II. Canon instead thought about users complaines, but not one step further.
All succesfull companies in the last 100 years stuck in their success and killed themselfs by feeling responsible for their stockholders not for their products and users.
That is the only cause why new companies like red start succesfull in a market they have never been in before.
Without Jobs (and I do not like him) apple will be down within a decade (they already have been and cryed for help), if they do not change this way of management.
Apr 21, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Previous versions of Ralph Conway's message #10565724 « Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D800 Review »
