Nikon's patent applications for mirrorless camera system?

Bruce wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's upcoming
mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/


No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the market
before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with DVD.

On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:
wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's upcoming
mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/


No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the market
before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with DVD.

I call that smart business.

BTW I am still waiting for answers to prior questions.

--
Peter
Just giving gentle reminders, not holding my breath.

On 11/7/2010 1:56 AM, Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's upcoming
mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the market
before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with DVD.

I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.


BTW I am still waiting for answers to prior questions.


Do they have anything to do with cameras?

In context, more than some of your comments. Read them again

--
Peter

On 11/7/2010 1:56 AM, Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's upcoming
mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the market
before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with DVD.

I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.


BTW I am still waiting for answers to prior questions.


Do they have anything to do with cameras?

asked and answered.

--
Peter

Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, peter wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce new
lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's not being
lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything that turns a
profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.

On 11/11/2010 10:00 AM, Neil Harrington wrote:
Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce new
lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's not being
lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything that turns a
profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.


Most likely a combination of management arrogance, a culture of "B"
school projections, stagnated innovation, coupled with UAW not wanting
to give back.


--
Peter

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, peter wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce new
lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's not
being lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything that
turns a profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.

Let's not forget GM's decision to come to all of those agreements with the
UAW over all of those years. They played a bigger part in it than the UAW
with all of the poor management decisions they made. They forgot the most
important thing about the business - to build a good car that people want.

"peter" wrote in message
...
On 11/11/2010 10:00 AM, Neil Harrington wrote:
Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce
new
lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's not
being
lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything that turns a
profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.


Most likely a combination of management arrogance, a culture of "B" school
projections, stagnated innovation, coupled with UAW not wanting to give
back.

There is, as you say, much more to it than the UAW. For many years, the
chairmen running GM were "bean counters". There was no engineering blood in
them, no love for cars. For far too long, GM wasn't building amny cars that
stood up to the competitor's. There were the niche cars like the Corvette
but not many volume sellers were up to par. They did good business selling
trucks like the Suburban and their pickups but they relied far too heavily
on those profits.

A lot of Americans would travel in Europe and remark about the great cars GM
sold over there but not here. Why they seemed to sell better cars in Europe
than here was a bit of a mystery. Now that they've gotten some religion,
we're seeing more of the Euro-designed cars here. Who would ave ever
thought that we'd see a great car from Buick again? Now we have two very
fine cars, the Lacrosse and Regal. They're fine because they're Opels.

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, peter wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce
new lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's not
being lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything that
turns a profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.

Let's not forget GM's decision to come to all of those agreements with the
UAW over all of those years.

Yes, that's true, but I think the union more or less had them (and the other
American auto makers) over a barrel. It's probably been easier for foreign
builders to come into the U.S. and set up shop in states where there was
little or no pre-existing union culture.

They played a bigger part in it than the UAW with all of the poor
management decisions they made. They forgot the most important thing
about the business - to build a good car that people want.

Actually they built some pretty good cars, though I don't doubt they built
some mediocre ones too. I've owned cars by all of the Big Three as well as
some German, British and Japanese cars. There have been very good ones and
pretty bad ones in all of those.

I switched to Chevrolet about eleven years ago, mostly because of a really
excellent local dealer. The '99 Lumina I bought then was a thoroughly
satisfactory car that gave me no trouble whatever over the six years I owned
it. Then I sold it to my sister who wanted it for her winter place in
Florida; she's still using it there and loves it.

I just recently traded in my '05 Malibu LS V6 for the '10 1LT model, and I'm
delighted with it so far. Handles well, very comfortable, economical, and
has everything I want in a car. This is the first four-cylinder car I've
owned in nearly 20 years, and I must say I'm impressed with the zip. I
didn't think I'd be happy with a four until I tried this one out. That
double overhead cam 2.4 liter with variable valve timing coupled with the
six-speed transmission makes one very efficient drive train. I'm actually
getting 30+ mpg on the interstate and it isn't even broken in yet.

And it looks great, too -- unlike the rather clunky looking '05.

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
news

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:29 pm, peter wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:24 AM, Rich wrote:



wrote in
:

From nikonrumors.com:

Patent application reveals new drawings of a Nikon mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera

Japanese patent application (2010-250149) contains some drawings of
the upcoming Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

For more details, and links to previous posts about Nikon's
upcoming mirrorless system. go to:

http://nikonrumors.com/

No, lazy, greedy Nikon (and Canon) are letting the others build the
market before jumping in. Kind of like how Disney and Sony did with
DVD.

Whatever works, works. Nikon and Canon (and every other company for that
matter) are properly in business to maximize profits, not to introduce
new lines of products that may or may not appeal to consumers. That's
not being lazy or greedy, unless you characterize as "greed" anything
that turns a profit.


I call that smart business.

I call it lack of innovation and the same lack of inertia that
bankrupted GM.

What bankrupted GM was mostly the UAW, not GM's decisions about product
lines.

Let's not forget GM's decision to come to all of those agreements with
the UAW over all of those years.

Yes, that's true, but I think the union more or less had them (and the
other American auto makers) over a barrel. It's probably been easier for
foreign builders to come into the U.S. and set up shop in states where
there was little or no pre-existing union culture.

I really don't know how much of a barrel GM or the other makers were over.
But GM should have stayed in control of the course of their business and not
let a union determine that course.

They played a bigger part in it than the UAW with all of the poor
management decisions they made. They forgot the most important thing
about the business - to build a good car that people want.

Actually they built some pretty good cars, though I don't doubt they built
some mediocre ones too. I've owned cars by all of the Big Three as well as
some German, British and Japanese cars. There have been very good ones and
pretty bad ones in all of those.

Yes, there were some good cars but GM lagged far behind their competitor's
overall. When you can look at Toyota, Nissin, and Honda and see that just
about every car they produced was good, at the top or close to the top of
their respective class, it makes GM loko outright poor. GM could never
produce a compact that came close to the quality of the Japanese makes or
VW. And to this day with the possible exception of the Chevy cobalt
replacement, they still haven't produced a good compact. Although GM has
given us great Vettes and some trucks, they also gave us the Vega, Citation,
Monza, Chevette, Cavalier, Sunbird, those awful 1st generation minivans, and
on and on. Let;s forget those cookie cutter boxes they made in the 80's.
That has begun to change. With the new Buick Lacrosse and Regal, they have
finally put a very good sedan on the road even if they got it from the
Germans. I think it's about time they brought in their Euro cars, they were
always better than most of the cars that were sold only in the US market.
Chevy made a big stride with the current Malibu and the rest of their lineup
is taking shape. Chrysler had some home runs like the 300C and the jeeps.
ford has been more consistent, IMO, in producing better cars than the other
two American makers. They also managed to keep their business afloat
without a government handout. That's better mangement than GM or Chrysler
has had.

I switched to Chevrolet about eleven years ago, mostly because of a really
excellent local dealer. The '99 Lumina I bought then was a thoroughly
satisfactory car that gave me no trouble whatever over the six years I
owned it. Then I sold it to my sister who wanted it for her winter place
in Florida; she's still using it there and loves it.

As good as tha Lumina was to you, can you honestly say that it was the equal
of a Camry or Accord? Not even close, IMO. The Japanses cars were so much
more refined.

I just recently traded in my '05 Malibu LS V6 for the '10 1LT model, and
I'm delighted with it so far. Handles well, very comfortable, economical,
and has everything I want in a car. This is the first four-cylinder car
I've owned in nearly 20 years, and I must say I'm impressed with the zip.
I didn't think I'd be happy with a four until I tried this one out. That
double overhead cam 2.4 liter with variable valve timing coupled with the
six-speed transmission makes one very efficient drive train. I'm actually
getting 30+ mpg on the interstate and it isn't even broken in yet.

I was able to average 28 mpg on the open highway in my Hemi Chrysler 300C!
Never thought I'd see a day like that.

And it looks great, too -- unlike the rather clunky looking '05.