Digital Doubts

[Wolf Hass]

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

 

[nazarenobellucci]

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

This is the truth

 

[Yada Day]

Jono,

Nice insight. The concepts you raise are discussed in a classic book about technology adoption and marketing called "Inside the Tornado" (which is a successor book to "Crossing the Chasm"); both are great books written by Geoffrey Moore.

Effectively G.M. lays out what enables technologies to become effectively conceived, designed, developed, and evolved and he talks about how technologies progress through a roughly bell shaped adoption curve. One of his most famous findings is the notion of the "Chasm". This is a little adjacent and beyond our thread here, but it's fascinatingly insightful and in my experience right on the mark - along with pretty much everything else in his books.

Anyway, to summarize, G.M. in his own books provides a critique of yet another book called "The Three Disciplines of Market Leaders". In TDML, the theory is that a company succeeds by having 1) Product Leadership, 2) Customer Intimacy, and 3) Operational Excellence (I might have these terms slightly off). In his books, G.M. says that while it is true that these 3 organizational imperatives are important, what is critical is the realization that only 2 of the 3 should be in effect at any one time. For example, when a company is bringing new technology to market for early adopters and the challenge is to find the "whole solution", the company must proactively emphasize Product Leadership and Customer Intimacy. The customer intimacy is important because the handholding not only sells the customer, but it gives a feedback channel to the company so the engineers and product marketing people (and management) can figure out what really makes customers happy and what wins competitively in the market. At this time the company's culture has to actively suppress Operational Excellence - otherwise employees mindlessly follow rigidly efficient operations but never quite figure out the winning whole solution for the customer.

Once the company gets the whole solution dialed in and they reach the "Tornado" stage where customers are lined up to buy the product, then the company must actively suppress Customer Intimacy and emphasize Operational Excellence. At this point G.M. says the closest thing the customer gets to intimacy is a refund - which the company should happily give so they can quickly get back to taking orders from other customers who are waiting in line to buy.

This is a very quick summary and much of his books are focused on what keeps companies "stuck in the chasm" between the early adopter and early majority inflection points of the adoption curve, and what causes the market leader to win and the losers to lose.

But, to your credit, you pretty much distilled the essence when you described an "advertising" mode vs. a customer handholding mode. Effectively, once a product or service solution really makes sense and it is apparent to the market in large scale, the customer should be able to figure it out, buy it and happily use it in a fairly self sufficient mode. Getting there (which is generally the point at which the company goes from investing in the product to getting a return on investment) is harder than it might seem. Along the way (and even afterward for complex systems) diligent, passionate engineers and sales people need to help customers (and their own companies) figure it out. As Moore's Law makes so many new things possible, there is much to be continuously figured out – both to survive and to get ahead (in fact, in the technology business unless you are getting ahead, you might not be surviving for too long. I have a great exec friend who likes to say “just keeping moving”). All of this complexity is going to keep expanding until someone finds a way to make a major simplification - which would be a major breakthrough for technology, business, and society. In the meantime, those that try to understand the dynamics at least can have a framework for thinking about, discussing, and acting on the challenges and opportunities.

Happy dp,

Yada Day

 

[Yada Day]

Theo, if anything is close to the essence itself, it's what you say: keep asking questions.

(Although it's good to provide some answers once in a while too

..... which is what Phil and dpreview.com does in spades

Going digital is big business for the manufactures
Casio just released 5 new pieces....crazy

Please stay awake...we can live without a digital cam...
Talk with friends (owners) before buying anything.
A good brand is not always a guaranty for quality...
Reed the forums of the last weeks

If possible: try before you buy and buy in a local store...
As I have learned (here and elswere)trouble comes after the sale!
Before the sale it's always "sunshine"

Don't buy some gray things....to spare a few bucks

Always be critical, ask questions.

Theo

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Theo
I can't live without a digital camera

trying it out is useless - the one thing I've learned is that finding out whether something os good or not takes time and dilligence

It's all very well being critical BEFORE you buy, but IMHO being too critical afterwards leads to obsessive behaviour with respect to insignificant problems (witness the hoohah about the D100 and sharpness which is currently going on-It might be an issue, but I've seen the results - they're great . . . and I don't have, or want one!). After you've bought it's better to look for the best way TO get what you want from your purchase, not for reasons why it was the wrong purchase.

Otherwise I agree with everything you say ;-)

I drink too much wine!

kind regards
jono slack

Theo

Going digital is big business for the manufactures
Casio just released 5 new pieces....crazy

Please stay awake...we can live without a digital cam...
Talk with friends (owners) before buying anything.
A good brand is not always a guaranty for quality...
Reed the forums of the last weeks

If possible: try before you buy and buy in a local store...
As I have learned (here and elswere)trouble comes after the sale!
Before the sale it's always "sunshine"

Don't buy some gray things....to spare a few bucks

Always be critical, ask questions.

Theo

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Yada

Phew! thank you for that, it was most interesting stuff. I'm allergic to management books, so I have to manage my company by the seat of the pants!

Personally I'm desperately trying to get past the 'customer handholding' mode. Failing miserably I'm afraid!

kind regards
jono slack

Jono,

Nice insight. The concepts you raise are discussed in a classic
book about technology adoption and marketing called "Inside the
Tornado" (which is a successor book to "Crossing the Chasm"); both
are great books written by Geoffrey Moore.

Effectively G.M. lays out what enables technologies to become
effectively conceived, designed, developed, and evolved and he
talks about how technologies progress through a roughly bell shaped
adoption curve. One of his most famous findings is the notion of
the "Chasm". This is a little adjacent and beyond our thread here,
but it's fascinatingly insightful and in my experience right on the
mark - along with pretty much everything else in his books.

Anyway, to summarize, G.M. in his own books provides a critique of
yet another book called "The Three Disciplines of Market Leaders".
In TDML, the theory is that a company succeeds by having 1) Product
Leadership, 2) Customer Intimacy, and 3) Operational Excellence (I
might have these terms slightly off). In his books, G.M. says that
while it is true that these 3 organizational imperatives are
important, what is critical is the realization that only 2 of the 3
should be in effect at any one time. For example, when a company
is bringing new technology to market for early adopters and the
challenge is to find the "whole solution", the company must
proactively emphasize Product Leadership and Customer Intimacy.
The customer intimacy is important because the handholding not only
sells the customer, but it gives a feedback channel to the company
so the engineers and product marketing people (and management) can
figure out what really makes customers happy and what wins
competitively in the market. At this time the company's culture
has to actively suppress Operational Excellence - otherwise
employees mindlessly follow rigidly efficient operations but never
quite figure out the winning whole solution for the customer.

Once the company gets the whole solution dialed in and they reach
the "Tornado" stage where customers are lined up to buy the
product, then the company must actively suppress Customer Intimacy
and emphasize Operational Excellence. At this point G.M. says the
closest thing the customer gets to intimacy is a refund - which the
company should happily give so they can quickly get back to taking
orders from other customers who are waiting in line to buy.

This is a very quick summary and much of his books are focused on
what keeps companies "stuck in the chasm" between the early adopter
and early majority inflection points of the adoption curve, and
what causes the market leader to win and the losers to lose.

But, to your credit, you pretty much distilled the essence when you
described an "advertising" mode vs. a customer handholding mode.
Effectively, once a product or service solution really makes sense
and it is apparent to the market in large scale, the customer
should be able to figure it out, buy it and happily use it in a
fairly self sufficient mode. Getting there (which is generally the
point at which the company goes from investing in the product to
getting a return on investment) is harder than it might seem.
Along the way (and even afterward for complex systems) diligent,
passionate engineers and sales people need to help customers (and
their own companies) figure it out. As Moore's Law makes so many
new things possible, there is much to be continuously figured out –
both to survive and to get ahead (in fact, in the technology
business unless you are getting ahead, you might not be surviving
for too long. I have a great exec friend who likes to say “just
keeping moving”). All of this complexity is going to keep
expanding until someone finds a way to make a major simplification

• which would be a major breakthrough for technology, business, and

society. In the meantime, those that try to understand the
dynamics at least can have a framework for thinking about,
discussing, and acting on the challenges and opportunities.

Happy dp,

Yada Day

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Yada Day]

You guys might be getting a little cynical. I have no way of knowing for certain, but I think companies like Nikon and Canon work hard to make a culture that places value on creating and delivering value. And I suspect most of their lesser competitors have similar objectives. The reality is that the technology development and the bringing to market processes are hard. It's sometimes difficult to get all your family members moving in the same good direction. Try doing it with 10,000 employees. And try to do it when the technology you are depedent upon is moving at lightning speed and accelerating, and all your competitors have roughly the same knowledge as you. It is competitive and challenging.

What the companies need is constructive feedback. After that we all get to vote with our pocketbook.

If you haven't been a manufacturer or a seller, try it some time; and if you're a company, trying being a customer of your products and service some time.

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

 

[Yada Day]

Jono, read Inside the Tornado. It will be save you years of trying to figure it all it; it will be the best thing for your company and bad for your competitors. Yada

Personally I'm desperately trying to get past the 'customer
handholding' mode. Failing miserably I'm afraid!

kind regards
jono slack

Jono,

Nice insight. The concepts you raise are discussed in a classic
book about technology adoption and marketing called "Inside the
Tornado" (which is a successor book to "Crossing the Chasm"); both
are great books written by Geoffrey Moore.

Effectively G.M. lays out what enables technologies to become
effectively conceived, designed, developed, and evolved and he
talks about how technologies progress through a roughly bell shaped
adoption curve. One of his most famous findings is the notion of
the "Chasm". This is a little adjacent and beyond our thread here,
but it's fascinatingly insightful and in my experience right on the
mark - along with pretty much everything else in his books.

Anyway, to summarize, G.M. in his own books provides a critique of
yet another book called "The Three Disciplines of Market Leaders".
In TDML, the theory is that a company succeeds by having 1) Product
Leadership, 2) Customer Intimacy, and 3) Operational Excellence (I
might have these terms slightly off). In his books, G.M. says that
while it is true that these 3 organizational imperatives are
important, what is critical is the realization that only 2 of the 3
should be in effect at any one time. For example, when a company
is bringing new technology to market for early adopters and the
challenge is to find the "whole solution", the company must
proactively emphasize Product Leadership and Customer Intimacy.
The customer intimacy is important because the handholding not only
sells the customer, but it gives a feedback channel to the company
so the engineers and product marketing people (and management) can
figure out what really makes customers happy and what wins
competitively in the market. At this time the company's culture
has to actively suppress Operational Excellence - otherwise
employees mindlessly follow rigidly efficient operations but never
quite figure out the winning whole solution for the customer.

Once the company gets the whole solution dialed in and they reach
the "Tornado" stage where customers are lined up to buy the
product, then the company must actively suppress Customer Intimacy
and emphasize Operational Excellence. At this point G.M. says the
closest thing the customer gets to intimacy is a refund - which the
company should happily give so they can quickly get back to taking
orders from other customers who are waiting in line to buy.

This is a very quick summary and much of his books are focused on
what keeps companies "stuck in the chasm" between the early adopter
and early majority inflection points of the adoption curve, and
what causes the market leader to win and the losers to lose.

But, to your credit, you pretty much distilled the essence when you
described an "advertising" mode vs. a customer handholding mode.
Effectively, once a product or service solution really makes sense
and it is apparent to the market in large scale, the customer
should be able to figure it out, buy it and happily use it in a
fairly self sufficient mode. Getting there (which is generally the
point at which the company goes from investing in the product to
getting a return on investment) is harder than it might seem.
Along the way (and even afterward for complex systems) diligent,
passionate engineers and sales people need to help customers (and
their own companies) figure it out. As Moore's Law makes so many
new things possible, there is much to be continuously figured out –
both to survive and to get ahead (in fact, in the technology
business unless you are getting ahead, you might not be surviving
for too long. I have a great exec friend who likes to say “just
keeping moving”). All of this complexity is going to keep
expanding until someone finds a way to make a major simplification

• which would be a major breakthrough for technology, business, and

society. In the meantime, those that try to understand the
dynamics at least can have a framework for thinking about,
discussing, and acting on the challenges and opportunities.

Happy dp,

Yada Day

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Yada Day]

Tiger Woods says it's all about balance.

Ask questions and be critical, but not too critical or obsessive. Don't let the wrong little things get in the way of the right big things.

It's all very well being critical BEFORE you buy, but IMHO being
too critical afterwards leads to obsessive behaviour with respect
to insignificant problems (witness the hoohah about the D100 and
sharpness which is currently going on-It might be an issue, but
I've seen the results - they're great . . . and I don't have, or
want one!). After you've bought it's better to look for the best
way TO get what you want from your purchase, not for reasons why it
was the wrong purchase.

Otherwise I agree with everything you say ;-)

I drink too much wine!

kind regards
jono slack

Theo

Going digital is big business for the manufactures
Casio just released 5 new pieces....crazy

Please stay awake...we can live without a digital cam...
Talk with friends (owners) before buying anything.
A good brand is not always a guaranty for quality...
Reed the forums of the last weeks

If possible: try before you buy and buy in a local store...
As I have learned (here and elswere)trouble comes after the sale!
Before the sale it's always "sunshine"

Don't buy some gray things....to spare a few bucks

Always be critical, ask questions.

Theo

First I love my 995 and gave up my film cameras and only shoot
digital. Its especially nice when you manage a digital (frontier)
photo lab. My customers only think my 370 is for their use but its
mine you understand.

What worrys me is that all camera manfacturers are in such a hurry
to get their piece of the digital pie that they have thrown serious
R & D out the window. With a film slr they plan on having a new
model in their line for three to four years. I think it has alot to
do with the fact the film market is very mature and does not grow
like the digital market. This also means that they can take three
to four years to develope, test, and market new products. I have
never seen a film camera introduced with the same problems as new
digitals.

With digital it is a game of who can get the newest, the fastest,
and get the biggest share of this growing market. The problem is we
play right into their game by jumping at every new camera they
throw at us. Doesn't make any difference if its gray market,
untested, if it looks good we throw cash at the manufacturers.

Look at Nikon alone, a recall on the d100 right out of the box, the
coolpix 5000 diaster with the accessories, the 5700 and focus
problems. Why arent these problems researched, found and corrected
before new model intoduction. This doesn't show much respect for
us the consumer. Maybe if we the consumers took a show me it works
before I buy mentality, the manufactorers would try harder to get
it right the first time.

Troutman

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk