my take on Kodak downfall

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

too often consumer systems were developed and then a professional system
was hacked out of it

as opposed to developing professional systems and watering them down for
consumer applications

would have taken some quick work too keep up with the consumer demand,
but Kodak was big enough to keep up with that I think

then there is the general USA/UN/WTO issue of fair trade versus free
trade allowing cheap imports from places with less consideration of
workers and environmentalism, etc.

but Kodak had plants in Mexico after NAFTA, so they should have been
able to invest that consumer film money better I think

--
Dale

In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

On 02/10/2014 07:42 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.


it isn't too late for Kodak, it might make the investments in digital
across the imaging board, staarting with their focus on commercial and
prepress labs and going to other focuses

might be some hybrid stuff out their too, they could use/license
intellectual property

maybe even some analog stuff that they could use/license intellectual
property too

they might not be a propreitary closed system dealer in all areas, but
starting with open standards they might be an open systems player, and
eventually perhaps develop themselves into intellectual property for ne
propreitary systems

I think they should start with capture though, professional
cameras/lenses lighting, etc.

--
Dale

In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

it isn't too late for Kodak, it might make the investments in digital
across the imaging board, staarting with their focus on commercial and
prepress labs and going to other focuses

it's too late for kodak.

might be some hybrid stuff out their too, they could use/license
intellectual property

maybe even some analog stuff that they could use/license intellectual
property too

that's about all they have now. they should sell their patents to
someone and call it a day.

they might not be a propreitary closed system dealer in all areas, but
starting with open standards they might be an open systems player, and
eventually perhaps develop themselves into intellectual property for ne
propreitary systems

I think they should start with capture though, professional
cameras/lenses lighting, etc.

what could they possibly do in that space that existing players haven't
done? nothing.

kodak never made cameras that were any good, although some were quite
popular such as the instamatic.

the kodak dslr hybrids were retrofitted canon/nikon cameras.

On 2014-02-10 18:36:46 +0000, nospam said:

In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

it isn't too late for Kodak, it might make the investments in digital
across the imaging board, staarting with their focus on commercial and
prepress labs and going to other focuses

it's too late for kodak.

might be some hybrid stuff out their too, they could use/license
intellectual property

maybe even some analog stuff that they could use/license intellectual
property too

that's about all they have now. they should sell their patents to
someone and call it a day.

they might not be a propreitary closed system dealer in all areas, but
starting with open standards they might be an open systems player, and
eventually perhaps develop themselves into intellectual property for ne
propreitary systems

I think they should start with capture though, professional
cameras/lenses lighting, etc.

what could they possibly do in that space that existing players haven't
done? nothing.

kodak never made cameras that were any good, although some were quite
popular such as the instamatic.

the kodak dslr hybrids were retrofitted canon/nikon cameras.

I disagree with you about Kodak never making cameras that were any
good. In the days before the SLRs captured the attention and money of
every amateur photographer as well as the pros, Kodak made some decent
cameras under their Retina Brand. Most of the good ones were made in
Germany with decent lenses and shutters. They were rangefinder cameras
with (usually) non-interchangeable 50mm lenses, but they were optically
and mechanically good and took good pictures for their day. Their day
ended when every wannabee bought a Nikon F or a Nikkormat. On the
otherhand, all those "wannabees" learned what f stops were and how to
properly expose pictures and focus lenses, something today's DSLR
"wannabees" don't bother to learn because the automation makes it
unnecessary if all they want is an expensive and pompous point and
shoot. Sorry for rambling a little bit OT.
--
Michael

[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

In article 2014021500570875641-adunc79617@mypacksnet, Michael
wrote:

I disagree with you about Kodak never making cameras that were any
good. In the days before the SLRs captured the attention and money of
every amateur photographer as well as the pros, Kodak made some decent
cameras under their Retina Brand. Most of the good ones were made in
Germany with decent lenses and shutters. They were rangefinder cameras
with (usually) non-interchangeable 50mm lenses, but they were optically
and mechanically good and took good pictures for their day. Their day
ended when every wannabee bought a Nikon F or a Nikkormat. On the
otherhand, all those "wannabees" learned what f stops were and how to
properly expose pictures and focus lenses, something today's DSLR
"wannabees" don't bother to learn because the automation makes it
unnecessary if all they want is an expensive and pompous point and
shoot. Sorry for rambling a little bit OT.
--
Michael

Indeed. While many of the Retina series were overly complex (they were
German, after all) and mechanically troublesome, you cant say they
didn't take a hell of a picture. Some of the best pictures I've ever
taken were with the utterly manual Retina IIa I used to carry
everywhere.

Granted, that was 40 years ago, and the camera wasn't new even then -
but Kodak had their glory says. At one time, I could open the Kodak
catalog at my camera store, and order every single thing a serious
photographer could need, from film, through cameras, to darkroom and on
to mounting supplies.

In article ,
nospam wrote:
In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

The second mouse gets the cheese.

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

On 02/10/2014 10:55 AM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
In article ,
nospam wrote:
In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

The second mouse gets the cheese.

Reminds me of working for Bell Labs. They invented the transistor, for
goodness sake. Yet they could not manufacture them very well. I got the
ones I needed when working there, from Philco, RCA, and Texas
Instruments. Raytheon made them too. Once I absolutely had to get a
Western Electric point contact transistor. A guy I knew at a nearby
military research and development site stole a bunch for me. Inside the
company, none were available.

Xerox PARC pretty much invented the first Apple computer but management
was afraid it would bring on the paperless society (remember that) and
they were in the paper-copying business, so they refused to go on with it.

Corporations have a lot to answer for.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key:166D840A 0C610C8B Registered Machine 1935521.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://linuxcounter.net
^^-^^ 12:30:01 up 5:25, 2 users, load average: 4.33, 4.48, 4.64

On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Paul Ciszek wrote:


In article ,
nospam wrote:
In article , Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

the key is the word *was*.

although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to
manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt.

The second mouse gets the cheese.

Sometimes the third or fourth.

But that's a good analogy, the computer mouse didn't take off till the
Macintosh in 1984, when it had been demonstrated in 1968 (so it had to
exist before that) and work done on it at PARC.

Michael

On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:28:28 -0500, Dale
wrote:

having worked there

consumer film was where the big money was

too often consumer systems were developed and then a professional system
was hacked out of it

as opposed to developing professional systems and watering them down for
consumer applications

would have taken some quick work too keep up with the consumer demand,
but Kodak was big enough to keep up with that I think

then there is the general USA/UN/WTO issue of fair trade versus free
trade allowing cheap imports from places with less consideration of
workers and environmentalism, etc.

but Kodak had plants in Mexico after NAFTA, so they should have been
able to invest that consumer film money better I think

There was a story going around about the Kodak CEO making a statement
about the digital threat: "how can we stop this digital thing?"

Or something like that. If true, well...

Kodak's management screwed the pooch. Some of the earliest digital
SLRs were Kodak conversions. Kodak sold the first full frame DSLR!
Granted, it wasn't great, but they had the tech and just let it die.
No excuses, this is a business school case study now.