Well, after trying to find it for a few hours, I've read in the manual (WOW)!

excuses, excuses...all so very much how Canon was great to do this...how it is so very normal...

T3 said:

Daniella, unfortunately, you are going to find the 300D's features
to be par for the course-- par for entry-level SLR cameras. It's
called price-point segmentation. Certain cameras in certain price
points within a certain genre of cameras are going to have certain
features. This does not mean comparing $900 digicams with $900
DSLR's with $900 SLR cameras. The 300D is an entry-level DSLR
camera, irrespective of the price. It, therefore, must be compared
to entry-level film SLR cameras. And as with entry-level SLR
cameras, the 300D has similar features to the Canon 300V/Rebel Ti,
or the Nikon N65, or the Maxxum 5-- none of which allow you to
select metering patterns like you can with higher cameras. So you
can whine and complain all you want, but that's just the way things
are.

Click to expand...

then I will whine and complain all I can. We had the EOS film rebel and we never had problem with the meetering.

And that's how camera companies differentiate their models

T3 said:

from one another within their model line. If you want to complain
that the $900 300D doesn't have the same feature-set of a $300 or
$400 film SLR, then you are just off your rocker. It costs a LOT
more to produce a DSLR than it does a film SLR.

Click to expand...

how much does it cost to cripple it? or to leave that basic feature in?

Film SLR's are

T3 said:

basically glorified empty boxes that hold film. DSLR's have very
expensive electronics and imaging sensors that make them much more
expensive. That's why the Canon 300V film SLR costs $200, and a
Canon 300D digital SLR costs $900. You must understand that.

Click to expand...

no I don't understand that. I do understand that Canon was counting on behavior like yours for acceptance of such fact....why they did this and why they thougth with good reasons that they could get away with it and still sell tons of 300D. People will excuse them for doing so, they will even bless them for doing so.

T3 said:

Also, if you have a complaint about Canon's $900 DSLR offering, you
can go anopther brand's $900 DSLR offering. Oh, there isn't one!

Click to expand...

again excuses excuses...plenty of it ))

T3 said:

That's because other manufacturers are having a tough time bringing
out a DSLR that inexpensive.

Click to expand...

oh really? how much more would it cost them to leave the meetering mode selectable?

And believe me, when they do, they

T3 said:

are going to strip down their models, too.

Click to expand...

yeah and this excuse that?

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

Daniella said:

well..if this is an amateur DSLR..you can expect that amateurs will
expect a 1000$ camera to have those basic features that their 300$
cam had.

Click to expand...

Daniella68313 said:

so why then does the 300$ camera has this ability? again..we are
talking about very basic photography feature here.. no fancy stuff.

Click to expand...

Daniella, you need to compare the 300D/DReb with the 300V/Rebel Ti. And the respective prices are ~$900 for the 300D/DReb versus ~$200 for the 300V/Rebel Ti. What you'll find is that the 300D and 300V have comparable features. But the 300D bests the 300V because it offers a 1/4000s shutter speed versus 1/2000s, a 1/200s x-sync versus 1/90s, a rechargeable battery versus no rechargeable, a battery charger versus no battery charger, histogram metering versus no histogram metering, instant review LCD versus no instant review LCD, a memory buffer versus no memory buffer, an in-camera CF card reader versus no in-camera CF card reader, a 6mp CMOS imaging sensor versus no imaging sensor, etc, etc, etc. Get the picture?!?! So, first of all, you are comparing the wrong camera price points between the film and digital SLR worlds. And secondly, you seem to ignore just what you are getting with the added cost of a 300D. And thirdly, you also forget that their are other cameras available with the exact features you want. But you seem to want those features without wanting to pay for them. Welcome to the free market economy and the principles of supply and demand. If you want it, you pay for it-- just like everything else in this world.

That's the camera that we had before we went digital...I never had those meetering problem with it. I beleive that the meetering was not linked to the focusing point.

T3 said:

Daniella said:

well..if this is an amateur DSLR..you can expect that amateurs will
expect a 1000$ camera to have those basic features that their 300$
cam had.

Click to expand...

T3 said:

so why then does the 300$ camera has this ability? again..we are
talking about very basic photography feature here.. no fancy stuff.

Click to expand...

Daniella, you need to compare the 300D/DReb with the 300V/Rebel Ti.
And the respective prices are ~$900 for the 300D/DReb versus ~$200
for the 300V/Rebel Ti. What you'll find is that the 300D and 300V
have comparable features. But the 300D bests the 300V because it
offers a 1/4000s shutter speed versus 1/2000s, a 1/200s x-sync
versus 1/90s, a rechargeable battery versus no rechargeable, a
battery charger versus no battery charger, histogram metering
versus no histogram metering, instant review LCD versus no instant
review LCD, a memory buffer versus no memory buffer, an in-camera
CF card reader versus no in-camera CF card reader, a 6mp CMOS
imaging sensor versus no imaging sensor, etc, etc, etc. Get the
picture?!?! So, first of all, you are comparing the wrong camera
price points between the film and digital SLR worlds.

Click to expand...

no, I am comparing a 300$ point and shoot to a 1000$ DSLR. The 300$ has this control, but not the DSLR. pitty. now does the fact that Canon released a 1000$ DSLR excuses the fact that they also crippled it from that basic feature? sorry I don't think so.

And

T3 said:

secondly, you seem to ignore just what you are getting with the
added cost of a 300D. And thirdly, you also forget that their are
other cameras available with the exact features you want. But you
seem to want those features without wanting to pay for them.

Click to expand...

now lets be logical about this...how much woudl it cost Canon to give us that control? I don't beleive this would even impair the 10D sales. It really makes me lough sometimes how people can come up with justification for this. I should be sooo greatful to Canon for giving me the chance to give them 1000$ and get a DSLR...crippled is a blessing! They should have crippled it even more and people would be even more happy with it.

T3 said:

Welcome to the free market economy and the principles of supply and
demand. If you want it, you pay for it-- just like everything else
in this world.

Click to expand...

all of you seem to think that meetering is a luxery that must cost a fortune...hello? this is a basic thing. It should not cost a fortune to have a working camera.

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

The cost of features has virtually nothing to do with the cost a manufacturer charges for that feature. Just take a look at Capture One Pro versus Capture One LE. C1 Pro has unlimited batch conversion. C1 LE has a 20 image batch conversion limit. C1 Pro costs $500. C1 LE costs $99. How much do you think it costs them to switch the 20 batch limit to unlimited? Nothing. It's artificially crippled. So as you can see, the hard cost of a feature has little or nothing to do with the actual price they charge. The same goes for virtually every product on the market. Do you really think a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt really costs 4 or 5 times as much to make than a no-name polo shirt? Of course not. Certain labels cost more just because of marketing, not because of the hard cost of manufacturing. You may not like it, but that is the way of the world. You may call it an "excuse", but that's not going to change anything. You just need to learn that this is the nature of a free market economy. And you need to put it all into perspective-- no other camera manufacturer is offering anything close to Canon's asking price for the 300D. So what is THEIR EXCUSE? Maybe it is because they are DEMANDING that their captive users spend MUCH more for their cheapest DSLR camera, priced at $1500?!?!

Daniella said:

That's the camera that we had before we went digital...I never had
those meetering problem with it. I beleive that the meetering was
not linked to the focusing point.

Click to expand...

If you used print film, the processing machine compensated for exposure irregularities. With digital, YOU are the processing machine, and YOU must compensate for exposure irregularities.

Daniella68313 said:

no, I am comparing a 300$ point and shoot to a 1000$ DSLR. The
300$ has this control, but not the DSLR. pitty. now does the fact
that Canon released a 1000$ DSLR excuses the fact that they also
crippled it from that basic feature? sorry I don't think so.

Click to expand...

Wrong comparison. 300D = 300V. Why is that so hard for you to understand. As for higher priced cameras, Elan 7 = 10D. If you want Elan 7 capabilities, you need to get the 10D.

Daniella68313 said:

now lets be logical about this...how much woudl it cost Canon to
give us that control? I don't beleive this would even impair the
10D sales. It really makes me lough sometimes how people can come
up with justification for this. I should be sooo greatful to Canon
for giving me the chance to give them 1000$ and get a
DSLR...crippled is a blessing! They should have crippled it even
more and people would be even more happy with it.

Click to expand...

Canon isn't forcing you to buy the 300D (which costs $900, not $1000). It's a free market. Buy the 10D if the 300D doesn't offer the features you want. Again, there are no free lunches. And the cost of an actual feature has virtually NOTHING to do with the price. It is the degree to which you WANT it that determines the price. Go back to any economics class and you will find that out. Do you think diamonds have intrinsic value? No! They cost what they do because people WANT diamonds and apply a value to it! Diamonds are just compressed carbon that get polished to look pretty. But give it to a woman and she goes gaga over it. That's why they can charge thousands of dollars for these rocks. Again, go back to any economics class.

Daniella68313 said:

all of you seem to think that meetering is a luxery that must cost
a fortune...hello? this is a basic thing. It should not cost a
fortune to have a working camera.

Click to expand...

Again, it has value because you WANT it. Giving a consumer everything a consumer WANTS, in a lower-price-point model jeapordizes the market value of higher-price-point models. That is the point of VALUE. You VALUE this feature, which is what determines the PRICE of this feature, not the actual hard cost of this feature (which is zero). Again, that is the nature of the free market system. It applies to the price of EVERTHING, from fruits and vegetables, to stock prices, to clothing. Get used to it because it isn't going to change any time soon.

Hi D.
I admire your stamina here .. doubt if it will have any result though ..

Basically: if the green square and all other P' s were removed including the a-dep and release lock when not in focus, but metering/servo/fec control were added it would be a perfect camera. It wouldn't be a point and shoot anymore, but hey: it isn't anyway.

In the mean time I recommend the purchase of something called an exposure meter. Mine's a Gossen Sixtomat, that will evaluate contrast and works great togheter with the M-option.

There is a flaw in this .. why would I want to buy a $200 meter to get a $1000 camera to expose correctly? I must have missed something..... or am I getting old and like my dad, complaining: ' in my time things actually worked' .

Daniella said:

T3 said:

Daniella said:

well..if this is an amateur DSLR..you can expect that amateurs will
expect a 1000$ camera to have those basic features that their 300$
cam had.

Click to expand...

Daniella68313 said:

so why then does the 300$ camera has this ability? again..we are
talking about very basic photography feature here.. no fancy stuff.

Click to expand...

Daniella, you need to compare the 300D/DReb with the 300V/Rebel Ti.
And the respective prices are ~$900 for the 300D/DReb versus ~$200
for the 300V/Rebel Ti. What you'll find is that the 300D and 300V
have comparable features. But the 300D bests the 300V because it
offers a 1/4000s shutter speed versus 1/2000s, a 1/200s x-sync
versus 1/90s, a rechargeable battery versus no rechargeable, a
battery charger versus no battery charger, histogram metering
versus no histogram metering, instant review LCD versus no instant
review LCD, a memory buffer versus no memory buffer, an in-camera
CF card reader versus no in-camera CF card reader, a 6mp CMOS
imaging sensor versus no imaging sensor, etc, etc, etc. Get the
picture?!?! So, first of all, you are comparing the wrong camera
price points between the film and digital SLR worlds.

Click to expand...

no, I am comparing a 300$ point and shoot to a 1000$ DSLR. The
300$ has this control, but not the DSLR. pitty. now does the fact
that Canon released a 1000$ DSLR excuses the fact that they also
crippled it from that basic feature? sorry I don't think so.

And

Daniella68313 said:

secondly, you seem to ignore just what you are getting with the
added cost of a 300D. And thirdly, you also forget that their are
other cameras available with the exact features you want. But you
seem to want those features without wanting to pay for them.

Click to expand...

now lets be logical about this...how much woudl it cost Canon to
give us that control? I don't beleive this would even impair the
10D sales. It really makes me lough sometimes how people can come
up with justification for this. I should be sooo greatful to Canon
for giving me the chance to give them 1000$ and get a
DSLR...crippled is a blessing! They should have crippled it even
more and people would be even more happy with it.

Daniella68313 said:

Welcome to the free market economy and the principles of supply and
demand. If you want it, you pay for it-- just like everything else
in this world.

Click to expand...

all of you seem to think that meetering is a luxery that must cost
a fortune...hello? this is a basic thing. It should not cost a
fortune to have a working camera.

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

Click to expand...

--
nice cam .. but what's that stupid colour doing there?

I am only saying that they crippled the wrong things...they crippled a very basic feature. I don't care for batch or camera 1. I just care to have a camera that works properly with a basic feature such as meetering mode, same as my 300$ camera does.

T3 said:

The cost of features has virtually nothing to do with the cost a
manufacturer charges for that feature. Just take a look at Capture
One Pro versus Capture One LE. C1 Pro has unlimited batch
conversion. C1 LE has a 20 image batch conversion limit. C1 Pro
costs $500. C1 LE costs $99. How much do you think it costs them
to switch the 20 batch limit to unlimited? Nothing. It's
artificially crippled. So as you can see, the hard cost of a
feature has little or nothing to do with the actual price they
charge. The same goes for virtually every product on the market.
Do you really think a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt really costs 4 or 5
times as much to make than a no-name polo shirt? Of course not.
Certain labels cost more just because of marketing, not because of
the hard cost of manufacturing. You may not like it, but that is
the way of the world. You may call it an "excuse", but that's not
going to change anything. You just need to learn that this is the
nature of a free market economy. And you need to put it all into
perspective-- no other camera manufacturer is offering anything
close to Canon's asking price for the 300D. So what is THEIR
EXCUSE? Maybe it is because they are DEMANDING that their captive
users spend MUCH more for their cheapest DSLR camera, priced at
$1500?!?!

Click to expand...

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

you're talking about diamond and I am talking about water...basic, essential..you know, that sort of things.

T3 said:

Daniella said:

That's the camera that we had before we went digital...I never had
those meetering problem with it. I beleive that the meetering was
not linked to the focusing point.

Click to expand...

If you used print film, the processing machine compensated for
exposure irregularities. With digital, YOU are the processing
machine, and YOU must compensate for exposure irregularities.

T3 said:

no, I am comparing a 300$ point and shoot to a 1000$ DSLR. The
300$ has this control, but not the DSLR. pitty. now does the fact
that Canon released a 1000$ DSLR excuses the fact that they also
crippled it from that basic feature? sorry I don't think so.

Click to expand...

Wrong comparison. 300D = 300V. Why is that so hard for you to
understand. As for higher priced cameras, Elan 7 = 10D. If you
want Elan 7 capabilities, you need to get the 10D.

T3 said:

now lets be logical about this...how much woudl it cost Canon to
give us that control? I don't beleive this would even impair the
10D sales. It really makes me lough sometimes how people can come
up with justification for this. I should be sooo greatful to Canon
for giving me the chance to give them 1000$ and get a
DSLR...crippled is a blessing! They should have crippled it even
more and people would be even more happy with it.

Click to expand...

Canon isn't forcing you to buy the 300D (which costs $900, not
$1000). It's a free market. Buy the 10D if the 300D doesn't offer
the features you want. Again, there are no free lunches. And the
cost of an actual feature has virtually NOTHING to do with the
price. It is the degree to which you WANT it that determines the
price. Go back to any economics class and you will find that out.
Do you think diamonds have intrinsic value? No! They cost what
they do because people WANT diamonds and apply a value to it!
Diamonds are just compressed carbon that get polished to look
pretty. But give it to a woman and she goes gaga over it. That's
why they can charge thousands of dollars for these rocks. Again,
go back to any economics class.

T3 said:

all of you seem to think that meetering is a luxery that must cost
a fortune...hello? this is a basic thing. It should not cost a
fortune to have a working camera.

Click to expand...

Again, it has value because you WANT it. Giving a consumer
everything a consumer WANTS, in a lower-price-point model
jeapordizes the market value of higher-price-point models. That is
the point of VALUE. You VALUE this feature, which is what
determines the PRICE of this feature, not the actual hard cost of
this feature (which is zero). Again, that is the nature of the
free market system. It applies to the price of EVERTHING, from
fruits and vegetables, to stock prices, to clothing. Get used to
it because it isn't going to change any time soon.

Click to expand...

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

Well, I remember a brochure, or an add about DR saying something like "focus point connected metering"... I think this was no secret to anybody. We can discuss that if it is what it should be, but it is advertised, and known.

I don't know if there is any feature that Canon claims that DR has, but then after you bought it you realize it doesn't have? I remember there are some discussion about FEC but i am not sure. If you buy things hoping that the manufacturer will make some changes on it later, then you'll be disappointed. Firmware upgrades are usually for fixing bugs. And apparently things you think as 'bug' is not 'bug' for Canon.

I have a P&S camera (a casio qv3000) and I am very pleased with it, user selectable 3 metering modes, users selectable focusing modes which DR lacks. I bought DR for the features that my casio lacks (which i am sure we already know). By the way, for me, as an amateur, a $1000 DSLR is equivalent to a $300 P&S camera in its class, perhaps that's why it is called 'entry level dslr'.

Sometimes you can make wrong decisions, if you don't like the camera, or you don't "excuse a little crippling here and there" then return it or sell it on ebay and go with another one that meets your expectations. If an $300 P&S is ok for you, then buy one.

regards,

Mel

Daniella:

How much is your time worth? You spend so much time complaining. If you sell it now, you would lose $100 or so...

On the other point:

Evaluative metering in contrasty scenes is always very tricky. Get a copy of Outdoor Photographer this month - there is an article that covers exactly this point. In "Understanding Exposure" Bryan Petersen also talks about this. This is the setting in which you meter a grey card, or do a spot meter on something middle reflectance (any color), or best - use an incident light meter. The "evaluative meter" doesn't know which to evaluate - the dark or the light. So small shifts willl change the meter reading significantly.

Do the "Light Meter" simulation under Demonstrations on this web page. Try the "overall average" meter and try moving your focal area around where the road meets the sky.

http://cwx.prenhall.com/bookbind/pubbooks/london3/chapter5/deluxe.html

Light meters can't read minds. They can only take "average" readings from a scene. If the scene is mixed dark and light, it is a roll of the dice.

Daniella said:

yinkhoon said:

Daniella said:

I am glad that you're happy that Canon cripplid your camera...I am
glad that you are happy to have paid 1000$ and loose a feature that
a 300$ camera has...like I said...Canon is a good judge of
foolishness and they were probably expecting people like you to
react like you did and get away with this crippling easily.

well..what do you knwo...they were right! ))

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

Click to expand...

--
Paul
------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic/photos
Digital Rebel, Tamron 29-75 f/2.8, 17-55
Olympus E-10,TCON-14B, WCON, FL 40
--------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2003 All rights reserved.

This is my last post on
the subject. It's useless
to offer her advice:
Daniella won't listen;
she has her mind made
up.

(She'd be--anyway--
better off with a P&S.
Too bad, because she
does have an eye for
photography.)

--
db.

Daniella said:

That's the camera that we had before we went digital...I never had
those meetering problem with it. I beleive that the meetering was
not linked to the focusing point.

Click to expand...

The 300V's evaluative was... from Canon's specification:

"Metering modes:
Evaluative (linkable to any AF point, automatically set in
all shooting modes except manual (M)
Partial (at centre), approx. 9.5% of viewfinder,
automatically set with AE Lock
Centreweighted average, automatically set in manual (M) mode"

This is the same as the 300D (and, IIRC, the same as the EOS500 I used to own).

Stuart

Daniella said:

phototakeouter said:

And does it make you feel better when you gripe at every chance you
get? Was considering another 5-letter word, but gripe works.

Click to expand...

yes it does make me feel much better.

Click to expand...

no, i'm sure it doesn't, because if it did you'd eventually get to the level of betterness where you would stop your whining. And at the rate you've been going on in here for the past few weeks, we don't see any sign of that.

Daniella68313 said:

Does

Daniella68313 said:

it change the camera's features?

Click to expand...

it might if enough people complain.

Click to expand...

no. another delusional response.

Daniella68313 said:

Daniella68313 said:

Really, Daniella, with all the photographic talent you do have,
it's a shame to see you carrying on this way.

Click to expand...

why? because I simply state the problems that I have with the
camera? now there is nothing wrong with doing so

Click to expand...

state your fact.
once, twice, three times even.

go beyond that and you're just making a public nuisance and a laughing stock out of yourself.

Daniella68313 said:

I will write this over and over again, to whom ever wants to read
it. now if someone don,t want to read any negative comments..all
they have to do is simply skip my posts.

Click to expand...

see that's just an example of how childish and selfish you are being because given that you are a talented photographer, people will want to see what you have to say, but probably not when they realise it's the same old drivel ad nauseum.

Actually, from an economics perspective, you're making a technical mistake.

The sort of behaviour you're describing is not typical of a free market, but rather of an oligopoly.

In a free market (where anyone would be able to enter the market without caring for patents, and other entrance costs), another company would imediately release a camera without the cripples, and they would outsell Canon out of the market, because they could add value to the camera without adding to the cost.

So, in a free market, the consequence is that you always get the best possible product your money can buy, and the only limiting factor is production cost.

In a free market, Canon would never get away with artificially crippling a camera.

Since they have a monopoly of the 300D and, together with a few other brands, they have an oligopoly of digital cameras, they can do this and get away with it.

I can accept these are the rules of the game. But please, don't call this a free market, which it isn't.

T3 said:

The cost of features has virtually nothing to do with the cost a
manufacturer charges for that feature. Just take a look at Capture
One Pro versus Capture One LE. C1 Pro has unlimited batch
conversion. C1 LE has a 20 image batch conversion limit. C1 Pro
costs $500. C1 LE costs $99. How much do you think it costs them
to switch the 20 batch limit to unlimited? Nothing. It's
artificially crippled. So as you can see, the hard cost of a
feature has little or nothing to do with the actual price they
charge. The same goes for virtually every product on the market.
Do you really think a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt really costs 4 or 5
times as much to make than a no-name polo shirt? Of course not.
Certain labels cost more just because of marketing, not because of
the hard cost of manufacturing. You may not like it, but that is
the way of the world. You may call it an "excuse", but that's not
going to change anything. You just need to learn that this is the
nature of a free market economy. And you need to put it all into
perspective-- no other camera manufacturer is offering anything
close to Canon's asking price for the 300D. So what is THEIR
EXCUSE? Maybe it is because they are DEMANDING that their captive
users spend MUCH more for their cheapest DSLR camera, priced at
$1500?!?!

Click to expand...

José Luís Malaquias said:

In a free market (where anyone would be able to enter the market
without caring for patents, and other entrance costs), another
company would imediately release a camera without the cripples, and
they would outsell Canon out of the market, because they could add
value to the camera without adding to the cost.

Click to expand...

What's stopping them?

The high cost of market entrance.
That is Economics 101.

The main factor keeping our markets from being truly free markets is the high cost of entrance, because one of the premises of free markets is that the cost of entering or leaving a market is zero.

In a competitive field such as digital photography, the costs of entering the market are prohibitive. Can you imagine how much it would cost to develop this camera from scratch and then marketing if you didn't have the technology background and the brand name-recognition?

And then you have the patent system that makes that high entrance cost even higher, because all the technologies you are bound to use have been patented by these companies.

Again, I'm not on a rampage against capitalism. I may not like the ruls, but I accept them. Just, please, don't tell me that this is a free market because technically it isn't.

MJD said:

José Luís Malaquias said:

In a free market (where anyone would be able to enter the market
without caring for patents, and other entrance costs), another
company would imediately release a camera without the cripples, and
they would outsell Canon out of the market, because they could add
value to the camera without adding to the cost.

Click to expand...

What's stopping them?

Click to expand...

Hello???

Without patents, nobody would be willing to make the costly investments over time to develop technology. Technology doesn't just fall from the sky. It is developed over years and years of hard work and effort. The result is a barrier to entry.

Free markets vary. There are very few barriers to entry if you are going to sell fruit. However, a free market for a sophisticated, technical product is going to involve established companies with significant barriers to entry.

Nonetheless, there will always be start up companies that will have a good idea that begin to develop a small piece of the technology. With success, and capital, they can grow to have a major, if not dominating place in the market.

For relatively recent examples - Compaq and Dell.

Paul

José Luís Malaquias said:

MJD said:

José Luís Malaquias said:

In a free market (where anyone would be able to enter the market
without caring for patents, and other entrance costs), another
company would imediately release a camera without the cripples, and
they would outsell Canon out of the market, because they could add
value to the camera without adding to the cost.

Click to expand...

What's stopping them?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Paul
------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic/photos
Digital Rebel, Tamron 29-75 f/2.8, 17-55
Olympus E-10,TCON-14B, WCON, FL 40
--------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2003 All rights reserved.

José Luís Malaquias said:

The main factor keeping our markets from being truly free markets
is the high cost of entrance, because one of the premises of free
markets is that the cost of entering or leaving a market is zero.
In a competitive field such as digital photography, the costs of
entering the market are prohibitive. Can you imagine how much it
would cost to develop this camera from scratch and then marketing
if you didn't have the technology background and the brand
name-recognition?

Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from, but in this case there are other companies who do have the technology background and the brand recognition. They're just a bit behind...

...where I come from? In terms of what? Politically? Camera-wise?

I don't think you can infer any of that from what I have written, but I would love to see what you read from my words.

MJD said:

José Luís Malaquias said:

The main factor keeping our markets from being truly free markets
is the high cost of entrance, because one of the premises of free
markets is that the cost of entering or leaving a market is zero.
In a competitive field such as digital photography, the costs of
entering the market are prohibitive. Can you imagine how much it
would cost to develop this camera from scratch and then marketing
if you didn't have the technology background and the brand
name-recognition?

Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from, but in this case there are other
companies who do have the technology background and the brand
recognition. They're just a bit behind...

Click to expand...

I think there is a misunderstanding here.
I was not attacking the patent system.

I don't like it, true, and I would have better alternatives, but that is not the issue here.

I could accept the patent system for lack of a better system, but the fact remains: with patents, no matter how fair or unfair they are, there is a barrier to entry, and any professional economist will tell you that you can no longer call it a free market in the pure technical sense of the expression. So, we can end the argument here, and I will accept the need for the patent system, while still insisting that the system is not a free market, without any pejorative intentions in my remark.

But, since you are such an adept of patents, have you ever tried to go through the patent jungle and file a patent?
The panorama is like this:

It will cost you over $20 000 just to get the process started. But then, you will find that someone has already filed a similar patent "just in case", even though your system is the first one to actually work. This happens because companies are allowed to register patents without proving that they actually have made such a system that works. So, if you have big pockets, you simply file a patent for anything that comes to mind, and should someone come up with an actual device that does what you imagined, you get to collect the fees for other people's work.

So, if you still want to go ahead and file your patent, you have to spend millions in legal fees to argue your patent rights in court.

But, so you say, I will be protected once I have the patent. Right? Wrong. Because first you need a huge infrastructure to actually know whether someone somewhere is using your patent without your knowledge.

And even if you are lucky enough to catch someone using your patent, you'd better hope it is not a big company you're up against. Becauce, if it is, most likely their legal department may tell them it's cheaper to sink you in legal fees and litigation rather than pay for your license. This is a purely economical decision. If you ask 4 million dollars for a license, but they figure they can beat you in court by spending 2 million, they will not hesitate.

Now, if you are a big company, then you are protected by the patent system because 1) your legal costs of filing a patent are much lower, because you have your own legal department specializing in that. 2) you have the infrastructure to know what your competitors are doing, and catch them using your work. 3) You have the legal resources to withstand a legal battle until your claim eventually wins. 4) If your opponent is a small company or individual, the mere threat of legal action will keep them from using your work.

So, my point is that we do need a system to reward intellectual work, but the current patent system is not it. It rewards the big guys who stiff innovation and bully other, while penalizing the small time inventors. This is the exact opposite of the initial intention of having a patent system. So, I think that some thought has to be given to the system. In principle anyone agrees with patents. But once you meet the reality, you will be surprised how perverted the system has become..

pbleic said:

Without patents, nobody would be willing to make the costly
investments over time to develop technology. Technology doesn't
just fall from the sky. It is developed over years and years of
hard work and effort. The result is a barrier to entry.

Free markets vary. There are very few barriers to entry if you are
going to sell fruit. However, a free market for a sophisticated,
technical product is going to involve established companies with
significant barriers to entry.

Nonetheless, there will always be start up companies that will have
a good idea that begin to develop a small piece of the technology.
With success, and capital, they can grow to have a major, if not
dominating place in the market.

For relatively recent examples - Compaq and Dell.

Paul

José Luís Malaquias said:

MJD said:

José Luís Malaquias said:

In a free market (where anyone would be able to enter the market
without caring for patents, and other entrance costs), another
company would imediately release a camera without the cripples, and
they would outsell Canon out of the market, because they could add
value to the camera without adding to the cost.

Click to expand...

What's stopping them?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Paul
------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic/photos
Digital Rebel, Tamron 29-75 f/2.8, 17-55
Olympus E-10,TCON-14B, WCON, FL 40
--------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2003 All rights reserved.

Click to expand...