«

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 05:29:52 -0700, QX <> wrote:

>On 6 Sep 2006 19:56:35 -0700, "Mr.Bolshoyhuy" <>
>wrote:
>
>>Seems a lot of brands/manufacturers have gotten out of the digital
>>camera market.
>>Some made cameras, but no longer do
>>Here is a partial list: AGFA, Contax, Epson, JVC, Konica-Minolta,
>>Kyocera, Sanyo, Toshiba.
>>All big names. Whats going on here?
>
>Konica-Minolta (KMMI) is very active with their line of Digital &
>Computed Radiography products for the medical market. I use their
>Regius-IM/XPress CR systems at work and it's really awesome as far as
>image quality, speed, and user friendliness.
>http://kmmi.konicaminolta.us/

Correction:
Make that Konica-Minolta Medical Imaging (KMMI).

In article < .com>,
wrote:

> > them, such as Casio, Polaroid, and Ricoh.
> > Here is a partial list: Epson,
>
> i like their printer

Unfortunately they cheat you on every cart you buy.
>
> >JVC
>
> i like theiraudio players

Steer clear of their VHS/DVD/HDD combos, though

It is alleged that Philip Homburg claimed:

> In article <>,
> Marvin <> wrote:
> >The bigger a company is, the harder it is for them to change
> >when new technology changes hte nature of the market, which
> >has happened in photography. There are some classic
> >examples. For example, not one of the companies that used
> >to make vacuum tubes for electronics made the transition to
> >semiconductors.
>
> Except that Kodak and Fuji make quite a lot digital cameras. And a
> significant fraction of the companies that made analog cameras also
> produce(d) digital cameras.

And some have transitioned almost entirely to digital. Didn't Nikon
dump the entire middle-range on film cameras this year, keeping only
the el-cheapos and high-ends?

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law." - George W.
Bush, November 2005 re: describing illegal immigrants

It is alleged that Mr.Bolshoyhuy claimed:

> Seems a lot of brands/manufacturers have gotten out of the digital
> camera market.
> Some made cameras, but no longer do; Others still do, but no one sells
> them, such as Casio, Polaroid, and Ricoh.

I got a Casio camera at Ritz only a few months ago. They had about a
half-dozen models on display. I think they had some Ricohs as well.

> Here is a partial list: AGFA, Contax, Epson, JVC, Konica-Minolta,
> Kyocera, Sanyo, Toshiba.
> All big names. Whats going on here?

I've never seen a Kyocera camera, ever. Nor JVC or Toshiba. From what
I've seen, out on the fringes of things, Minolta has been a slowly
dying brand ever since they failed to make it in the autofocus SLR
market, eventually being acquired by Konica, and now apparently Sony(!)
if Sony's new DSLR is any indication.

> We are left with these. However, I do not like proprietary flash cards,
> anything other than CF or SD.
> P&S: Fuji & Olympus still use xD, and Sony uses MemoryStick (Canon

I think xD was supposed to be the "even smaller form factor"
replacement to SD and just never really caught on. IOW, it's not a
proprietary format, it's just widely used. MemoryStick, however...
that's the main reason why I eventually replaced my Sony ultracompact
with the Casio. And then discovered that its speed and picture quality
means I can use it to also replace my Sony regular-compact.

> PS: why is CF used in DSLRs instead of SD?

Size and speed would be my guess. Until very recently, SD couldn't
touch CF capacities, and likewise the speed issue is only recently
getting even. Plus, DSLRs have the physical size to hold a CF card and
the compacts don't.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"Ambassador Delenn remains indisposed." "Indisposed? She's in a
cocoon!" "Yes." (Lennier and Amb. Mollari, B5 "Revelations")

Marvin wrote:

<edited, for brevity>

> The bigger a company is, the harder it is for them to change
> when new technology changes hte nature of the market, which
> has happened in photography. There are some classic
> examples. For example, not one of the companies that used
> to make vacuum tubes for electronics made the transition to
> semiconductors.


Hello, Marvin:

Are you sure about this? I find it hard to believe, that no tube
manufacturer made the "transition to transistors!" <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <>

Stewy wrote:
>
> In article < .com>,
> wrote:
>
> > > them, such as Casio, Polaroid, and Ricoh.
> > > Here is a partial list: Epson,
> >
> > i like their printer
>
> Unfortunately they cheat you on every cart you buy.
> >
> > >JVC
> >
> > i like theiraudio players
>
> Steer clear of their VHS/DVD/HDD combos, though


Hello, Stewy:

So sad, but true, about Epson!


Cordially,
John Turco <>

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 07:56:29 -0400, John Turco wrote:

> Marvin wrote:
>
> <edited, for brevity>
>
>> The bigger a company is, the harder it is for them to change
>> when new technology changes hte nature of the market, which
>> has happened in photography. There are some classic
>> examples. For example, not one of the companies that used
>> to make vacuum tubes for electronics made the transition to
>> semiconductors.
>
>
> Hello, Marvin:
>
> Are you sure about this? I find it hard to believe, that no tube
> manufacturer made the "transition to transistors!" <g>
>
>
> Cordially,
> John Turco <>
Yes - Phillips (of Eindhoven) used to make valves (Mullard Ltd was the
subsidiary in the UK) and then made transistors.

--
Neil
Delete l to reply

On 11 Sep 2006 07:56:29 EDT, John Turco wrote:

>> The bigger a company is, the harder it is for them to change
>> when new technology changes hte nature of the market, which
>> has happened in photography. There are some classic
>> examples. For example, not one of the companies that used
>> to make vacuum tubes for electronics made the transition to
>> semiconductors.
>
>
> Hello, Marvin:
>
> Are you sure about this? I find it hard to believe, that no tube
> manufacturer made the "transition to transistors!" <g>

Although I can't say for sure, I'd guess that Raytheon made both.
Fairchild made memory chips but I don't know if they ever made
tubes. RCA made tubes, I believe, and I know that they produced
computer chips. Their early COSMAC 4-bit cpu with its innovative
architecture was one of the first.

ASAAR <> wrote:
>On 11 Sep 2006 07:56:29 EDT, John Turco wrote:

>>> The bigger a company is, the harder it is for them to change
>>> when new technology changes hte nature of the market, which
>>> has happened in photography. There are some classic
>>> examples. For example, not one of the companies that used
>>> to make vacuum tubes for electronics made the transition to
>>> semiconductors.
>>
>>
>> Hello, Marvin:
>>
>> Are you sure about this? I find it hard to believe, that no tube
>> manufacturer made the "transition to transistors!" <g>

> Although I can't say for sure, I'd guess that Raytheon made both.
>Fairchild made memory chips but I don't know if they ever made
>tubes. RCA made tubes, I believe, and I know that they produced
>computer chips. Their early COSMAC 4-bit cpu with its innovative
>architecture was one of the first.

I think that the point was that dominance moved to other
companies. RCA, which was the industry giant, basically
sank without a trace in spite of some feeble efforts in
producing chips.

The early chip leader in the US was Texas Instruments which
produced a full line of ICs back in the days when a CPU
board might contain about 100 chips. Then they too lost
the lead.

---- Paul J. Gans

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:06:31 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans wrote:

>> Although I can't say for sure, I'd guess that Raytheon made both.
>> Fairchild made memory chips but I don't know if they ever made
>> tubes. RCA made tubes, I believe, and I know that they produced
>> computer chips. Their early COSMAC 4-bit cpu with its innovative
>> architecture was one of the first.
>
> I think that the point was that dominance moved to other
> companies. RCA, which was the industry giant, basically
> sank without a trace in spite of some feeble efforts in
> producing chips.

That's a valid point. If only it was the one that was made.


> The early chip leader in the US was Texas Instruments which
> produced a full line of ICs back in the days when a CPU
> board might contain about 100 chips. Then they too lost
> the lead.

And another maker of mini and micro computers, and I was once
interested in their 99000 microcomputer chip set. Aren't they still
one of the larger producers of DSPs, or have they lost the lead
there as well?