Thom is talking about software as the way out for photo companies

Started Feb 27, 2014 | Discussions thread
Truman Prevatt
Truman Prevatt Veteran Member • Posts: 6,249
Re: Thom is talking about software as the way out for photo companies

David314 wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

First of all Motorola problems had nothing to do with software or firm ware of their cell phones- Motorola's problems are it went broke when it took a billion dollar gamble on a satellite phone system (Iridium) that flopped.

and it was geared around voice and has low bandwidth, had they seen that data was the driver for communication, not voice, it might have been a different story

Go read a little history. Motorola was not the only reputable company that ventured into space based cellular communications. At the time no one was passing data over cell phones - that was 10 years off. However, the goal was to be able to connect areas of the world with no telephone infrastructure with a telephone infrastructure. There were two other companies that came to the same conclusions reading the same tea leaves. There were three big players, Motorola, Loral Space's Globalstar and TRW's (now Northrop Grumman's) Odyssey. At the time the only basic phone service to many parts of the world was Inmarsat - which is very expensive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inmarsat

All the three above saw it as a huge untapped market.  Motorola made some very serious system engineering mistakes - being an RF company and not an satellite company - with its design which ended up eating their lunch.  That was the necessary use of cross links and the necessity to keep the satellites in a very tight formation to support the cross links in a very low orbit.  That meant that they had to burn fuel to maintain normal orbital station keeping which meant the mean mission duration of the space craft were low ( you can only carry so much fuel).  If Motorola had paid more attention to Lockheed who build their satellite busses they would have been much better off - but they didn't.

I consulted with Loral (actually worked for a different division at the time) and Loral's design did not use cross links, used a higher orbit (less drag) and used a bent pipe (instead of cross links) for signal distribution.  Loral also turned to Qualcom for their radios and Qualcom was willing to eat the development cost for exclusive rights to sell the radios (phones).

At some point the market collapsed for satellite cellular service. There wasn't as much demand as the marketing types predicted and the cost was greater than projected - especially for Motorola who had never built, flew or supported a satellite before.  Both Iradium and Globalstar ware still around serving special needs.  But at the end of the day, Inmarsat is still serving most of the (especially maritime )needs.

Motorola's wounds were self inflicted - very poor inefficient design since they had zero experience in building space systems.  It cost them dearly.  It took them from one of the best electronic companies in the US to one that can't build a cell phone that holds up for more than a year. Sad, but an example of corporate arrogance.

Today we are moving rapidly to voice over LTE in our cell systems.  That is it is all data, and voice is multiplexed in an internet protocol over the data.  Voice over IP has some serious issues - especially when networks get loaded.  I'm waiting to see the issues that arise because of that - and trust me they will arise.

They finally did that - called Android. But they were too late. The big issue with Motorola's phones is according to current data they are the most unreliable phones out there.

AMotorola never fully made the transition to the commercial market where people trade out devices every year or two and cost - not design and build quality is the driving factor.

See here you argue that Motorola made too good of products and later you argue that they were not successful because they made crappy hardware - cell phones

people will pay for good products, example iPhones

Apple is not a S/W company nor a H/W company - they are a systems company.

Exactly, and the system for digital photography does not end with the click of the shutter

Lets see what is more important - a practical 25 stop sensor or the ability for my D800E to reduce its 36 MP image to a 480/640 jpeg to grandmother out over the LTE phone link it has built into the camera. The camera companies have their plates full developing the next generation imaging technologies for their high end cameras.

That is the point, getting the picture to grandma is very important, more so than producing a 29 stop dr image that no one can see or display

concentrating on just the hardware and not considering the system, is not a path to greatness, that is just what you said above

i think the real problem with Motorola and Hewlett Packard, IBM, kodak, etc. is they weren't agile enough to adapt quickly to changing conditions

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

 Truman Prevatt's gear list:Truman Prevatt's gear list
Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-Pro2 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow