If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#352
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
Bill W wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:31:39 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: I don't really understand what you're saying. People who call support for repair services are outside the industry, and they call separate numbers depending on whether they are business or residential. Those departments are completely separate, and no techs work in both. No technicians work in either! Techs work in Plant Operations. I'm talking about repair technicians. They work in repair - either the business or residential side. They DON'T. "Repair" technicians are part of Operations. A totally separate entity from either Sales or Marketing. Operations, unlike Sales and Marketing, is not divided between business and residential. Business phones are not more important than the residential phones that call them. But they are far more important to the user, and the business side demands, and gets, faster service. That is simply not true in the way you are claiming! The two sides are equally important to each other, because a Business line that is not used due to lack of customers with service is worthless. The Business services do in fact get "faster service", but not for repair. They get a great deal more attention from Sales and Marketing. The Sales people are simply phenomenal when it comes to rattling off all the variations and knowing which might help any given customer. For a typical technician it is mind boggling. The Marketing people are equally fantastic at understanding the usefulness of the latest technologies. Technology has been moving very fast for decades now, and Operations people are typically 15 years behind! Marketing people are thinking 5 years ahead. Again, it is mind boggling. But make no mistake, there are zero "repair technicians" in either Sales or Marketing. None. Not one. Worse yet, it is generally true that very few Sales or Marketing people ever so much as speak to anyone in Operations. Oddly that is extremely true in the mid-levels, while a few lower level people may have Operations friends from previous jobs. At the high end the VP's do communicate. That can be interesting though as many an Operations VP is consider a pure dolt by Marketing, and they are not wrong either. I'm, starting to wonder if we are talking about two different things. It cannot work the same in a very small town. As an extreme example, if there is one tech, he obviously must do both business and residential. How many techs do you think ATT has in the entire Pacific North West? How many companies are there that operate totally "in a very small town" at all? Small town telco's are not small town businesses, they are owned and operated by national companies with many branch offices, but the Sales and Marketing departments are not functional at those branch levels, they are consolidated in some large city. And that is equally true of Operations. There generally is no one solitary tech that services one solitary small office! That has other significance you might not have realized too... In the time frame from 1978 through about 2000 the entire industry went from totally analog to totally digital. The driving force was the cost of labor, spelled "Technician". Once they paired that down, it was "Windshield Wiper Time" for the few remaining technicians. The effect was that all work at any location was scheduled for when a technician would be on location. And all equipment that had high maintenance was replaced with new technology that didn't (even if it did). The classic example was Northern Telecom's marketing of their DMS digital switching systems in the 1980's. They were forbidden to say anything to a customer that even hinted that it ever required maintenance. For example, NTI would not discuss connecting computers to their switching systems, at all. No analysis that appeared to be connected to maintenance. Of course they did some of that analysis in the switch, which is a monster computer, but they would not talk about it with their customers. By 1975 both ATT and NTI had designed digital switches, but they both had to use an analog (relay) switching network. The difference was that NTI's CEO saw the future and demanded that theirs be built plug compatible with what a digital network fabric would be when the technology was available, switching the digital stream rather than an analog stream. ATT build theirs compatible with their existing switching fabric. And when the digital switch fabric was available, in 1977-8 NTI dropped it into their DMS line of switches and started advertising maintenance free switches. ATT had to totally redesign their entire switching architecture. NTI grabbed a whopping 40% of the non ATT market! Small places with high labor costs rapidly moved to all digital switching, almost all using NTI switching. Alaska, with the highest labor cost (I'm a very expensive technician) was number 1 in the country, and was nearly all digital by perhaps 1985 when the rest of the country was about 33 percent digital. Places with a Right To Work Law and low wages were the slowest and didn't come around until the late 1990's. Nobody has separate maintenance crews for business and residential. The equipment is not different, the duplicating the administrative cost, not to mention the Windshield Wiper Time, is prohibitive. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#353
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:05:23 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 6/6/2017 1:16 PM, nospam wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: When systems go down, business phones get priority in repair.(at least in theory.) Go to an appropriate source, and look up the difference between theory an practice. Here on the Isle of Long, when power goes out, power restoration is prioritized, in theory. everything is prioritized. to not do so is foolish. From that last statement, we can conclude that according to nospam, nobody is foolish. you certainly are. yep! Trying to have a rational discussion with you, certainly is. I guess that's why you weren't. :-) -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#354
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 12:11:56 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: it also has absolutely nothing whatso****ingever to do with qualcomm's absurd pricing, which you even agree is *illegal*. I've done no such thing. yes you did, stating that it's well established case law to not charge higher prices for the same part. I can't find where I said that. I don't think I said that. you did, when i mentioned sandisk charging more for the *same* memory card if it goes into a top of the line slr versus a p&s. It still doesn't ring a bell. I've gone hunting and I found where you wrote and I replied as follows: imagine if sandisk charged a higher price for the exact same memory card if it were to be used it in a high end nikon slr versus a coolpix. The memory card is the end product. This is well covered in law. that's the one. There are two aspects to this. First you can buy a license to use an inventors technology. Second, the inventor can sell a finished product. Nikon is not using Sandisk technology. Nikon is buying a finished product from Sandisk which is using Sandisk's own technology. apple, samsung, lg, motorola are buying a finished product from qualcomm, that being a baseband modem chip. And Qualcomm is free to sell it on whatever FRAND conditions it likes. When Sandisk sells its own product it doesn't require the purchaser to license the technology. But if the XYZ Battery Co wanted to use Sandisk technology in its own batteries, it would have to pay Sandisk a license fee. absolutely, however, that fee would not depend on whether the battery is used in a $1 flashlight or a $1000 electronic flash or a $100,000 car. Nor, in the Qualcomm case, does the fee depend on whether the iPhone is used by a destitute drunk or Bill Gates. You have gone a step too far up the chain with your analogy. But I never said "it's well established case law to not charge higher prices for the same part." A seller can and does charge what he likes. except when it's frand patents, and when they have a monopoly on it. They especially can when they have a monopoly. All FRAND licensing does is to require that the inventor charges the same license fee for everyone. Most of the argument is about whether Qualcomm is complying with the Fair and Reasonable bit. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#355
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: There are two aspects to this. First you can buy a license to use an inventors technology. Second, the inventor can sell a finished product. Nikon is not using Sandisk technology. Nikon is buying a finished product from Sandisk which is using Sandisk's own technology. apple, samsung, lg, motorola are buying a finished product from qualcomm, that being a baseband modem chip. And Qualcomm is free to sell it on whatever FRAND conditions it likes. no When Sandisk sells its own product it doesn't require the purchaser to license the technology. But if the XYZ Battery Co wanted to use Sandisk technology in its own batteries, it would have to pay Sandisk a license fee. absolutely, however, that fee would not depend on whether the battery is used in a $1 flashlight or a $1000 electronic flash or a $100,000 car. Nor, in the Qualcomm case, does the fee depend on whether the iPhone is used by a destitute drunk or Bill Gates. You have gone a step too far up the chain with your analogy. it's not who uses it, but what else goes into it. samsung pays more for the same modem chip when they put it into a galaxy s8 versus a flipper. But I never said "it's well established case law to not charge higher prices for the same part." A seller can and does charge what he likes. except when it's frand patents, and when they have a monopoly on it. They especially can when they have a monopoly. All FRAND licensing does is to require that the inventor charges the same license fee for everyone. Most of the argument is about whether Qualcomm is complying with the Fair and Reasonable bit. they're not charging the same fee, even to the same buyer. that's one of the problems. |
#356
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 15:26:16 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote: Bill W wrote: On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:31:39 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: I don't really understand what you're saying. People who call support for repair services are outside the industry, and they call separate numbers depending on whether they are business or residential. Those departments are completely separate, and no techs work in both. No technicians work in either! Techs work in Plant Operations. I'm talking about repair technicians. They work in repair - either the business or residential side. They DON'T. "Repair" technicians are part of Operations. A totally separate entity from either Sales or Marketing. Operations, unlike Sales and Marketing, is not divided between business and residential. But that makes zero difference. Within Operations, there is repair. Within repair, there is business, and there is residential. I know this for a fact, and it's all I'm trying to say. You really seem to be talking about a single entity, but I'm not. Let's take CenturyLink. If there is a phone or DSL system failure at a residence, they will "try to get someone out tomorrow, but it might be the next day". With a business phone outage, they are going there as quickly as possible. Some businesses are simply *out* of business with a phone failure, and they are not going to wait until the next day, or whenever. Someone is going to fix their phones NOW. Business phones are not more important than the residential phones that call them. But they are far more important to the user, and the business side demands, and gets, faster service. That is simply not true in the way you are claiming! The two sides are equally important to each other, because a Business line that is not used due to lack of customers with service is worthless. Again, we must be talking about two different things based on my above example. The Business services do in fact get "faster service", but not for repair. They get a great deal more attention from Sales and Marketing. The Sales people are simply phenomenal when it comes to rattling off all the variations and knowing which might help any given customer. For a typical technician it is mind boggling. *Everyone* gets rapid service if they are a potential customer, not just business customers. The Marketing people are equally fantastic at understanding the usefulness of the latest technologies. Technology has been moving very fast for decades now, and Operations people are typically 15 years behind! This makes zero sense. The technical folks, the repair folks, they absolutely *must* be up on the latest tech, or what good is it? Someone has to make it work, and it's not going to be the sales people. Marketing people are thinking 5 years ahead. Again, it is mind boggling. But my broken phone line is not from the future. Marketing people are useless to customers who need repair, and repair is all that this discussion is about. But make no mistake, there are zero "repair technicians" in either Sales or Marketing. None. Not one. Well of course not. Worse yet, it is generally true that very few Sales or Marketing people ever so much as speak to anyone in Operations. Oddly that is extremely true in the mid-levels, while a few lower level people may have Operations friends from previous jobs. At the high end the VP's do communicate. That can be interesting though as many an Operations VP is consider a pure dolt by Marketing, and they are not wrong either. I'm, starting to wonder if we are talking about two different things. It cannot work the same in a very small town. As an extreme example, if there is one tech, he obviously must do both business and residential. How many techs do you think ATT has in the entire Pacific North West? How many companies are there that operate totally "in a very small town" at all? Small town telco's are not small town businesses, they are owned and operated by national companies with many branch offices, but the Sales and Marketing departments are not functional at those branch levels, they are consolidated in some large city. And that is equally true of Operations. There generally is no one solitary tech that services one solitary small office! That has other significance you might not have realized too... My example was intentionally extreme. The point is that what works in Chicago will probably not work in a random, isolated, small town. Nobody has separate maintenance crews for business and residential. Nearly everyone has separate repair crews. I have never heard of one that does not. Like I said, all my friends who worked in telecom repair for at least forty years always worked in either residential or business, but *never* both at the same time. Never, and that includes a variety of companies in Chicago. |
#357
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
Bill W wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 15:26:16 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: Bill W wrote: On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:31:39 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: I don't really understand what you're saying. People who call support for repair services are outside the industry, and they call separate numbers depending on whether they are business or residential. Those departments are completely separate, and no techs work in both. No technicians work in either! Techs work in Plant Operations. I'm talking about repair technicians. They work in repair - either the business or residential side. They DON'T. "Repair" technicians are part of Operations. A totally separate entity from either Sales or Marketing. Operations, unlike Sales and Marketing, is not divided between business and residential. But that makes zero difference. Within Operations, there is repair. Within repair, there is business, and there is residential. I know this for a fact, and it's all I'm trying to say. You think you know something. I am not guessing. There is no division between residential and business within Operations (which is repair). NONE. You are confusing Sales and Marketing department distinctions with Plant Operations. And from outside it would be very difficult to know the differences. Typically customers don't even talk to Plant Operations people. Most companies make that a very difficult divide to cross... You really seem to be Nearly everyone has separate repair crews. I have never heard of one that does not. Like I said, all my friends who worked in telecom repair for at least forty years always worked in either residential or business, but *never* both at the same time. Never, and that includes a variety of companies in Chicago. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#358
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 09:51:03 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote: Qualcomm have the right to devise any pricing scheme they want to license their technology. Apple has the choice to either pay or look for other technology. Yep. That's the way it works. .... and this gives a clue as to why Qualcomm believes the use of their technology is worth more than that of others: https://www.investorvillage.com/smbd...g&mid=17244579 or http://tinyurl.com/y9k8rwm9 -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#359
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Qualcomm have the right to devise any pricing scheme they want to license their technology. Apple has the choice to either pay or look for other technology. Yep. That's the way it works. ... and this gives a clue as to why Qualcomm believes the use of their technology is worth more than that of others: that isn't the issue. |
#360
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 18:51:46 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Qualcomm have the right to devise any pricing scheme they want to license their technology. Apple has the choice to either pay or look for other technology. Yep. That's the way it works. ... and this gives a clue as to why Qualcomm believes the use of their technology is worth more than that of others: that isn't the issue. Says who? -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
have i managed to buy a camera with two faulty lenses | sean-sheehan | 35mm Photo Equipment | 21 | September 20th 10 05:37 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital Photography | 23 | December 22nd 05 07:18 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | December 22nd 05 07:18 PM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 02:13 AM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 02:13 AM |