Kodak bankruptcy

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dale, Mar 16, 2012.

  1. Dale

    Dale Guest

    I used to work in Kodak R&D. (too much corporate culture and middle
    management)

    If I was a stakeholder in Kodak's reorganization, I would like to see
    them map out the workflows of all possible imaging chains, and make
    business cases on hard facts as opposed to just brand value, whether
    they be AgX, digital, or hybrid.

    Where imaging chains intertsect or get jumbled I'd like to see them
    provide open standard solutions and play nice with other provider's.
    This is where brand value can lead the way.

    On the TV news I heard they were going to drop digital capture and focus
    on packaging, printers and software. Still hanging on to AgX capture?
    Not playing a role in digital cameras, scanners and sensors doesn't seem
    like someone who wants to take pictures further.


    --
    Dale
     
    Dale, Mar 16, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dale

    Dale Guest

    On 03/16/2012 06:25 AM, Dale wrote:
    > I would like to see them map out the workflows



    maybe use-case is a better word than workflow in the OO software sense.

    --
    Dale
     
    Dale, Mar 16, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    Dale <> wrote:
    >I used to work in Kodak R&D. (too much corporate culture and middle
    >management)
    >
    >If I was a stakeholder in Kodak's reorganization, I would like to see
    >them map out the workflows of all possible imaging chains, and make
    >business cases on hard facts as opposed to just brand value, whether
    >they be AgX, digital, or hybrid.


    I'd like to see them preserve as much manufacturing and design
    documentation as possible for all the products they'll shed, and
    license it at no cost to anyone who is willing to make the stuff.

    Kodak doubtless does not want to be in the low-volume, high-price
    art materials market, but there's no reason the analog products
    should die and become impossible to ever bring back (which is what
    will happen without Kodak's detailed process documentation for making
    them) just because Kodak can't economically make them any more.

    Kodak could probably even derive significant tax benefits from giving
    all the associated intellectual property to a charity created for the
    purpose. Or use one they already have handy, like, say, Eastman House.

    But I cannot imagine how one would ever get this idea in front of the
    appropriate people associated with the bankruptcy. Sigh...

    --
    Thor Lancelot Simon
    "The liberties...lose much of their value whenever those who have greater
    private means are permitted to use their advantages to control the course
    of public debate." -John Rawls
     
    Thor Lancelot Simon, Mar 16, 2012
    #3
  4. Dale

    aruzinsky Guest

    On Mar 16, 4:25 am, Dale <> wrote:
    > I used to work in Kodak R&D. (too much corporate culture and middle
    > management)
    >
    > If I was a stakeholder in Kodak's reorganization, I would like to see
    > them map out the workflows of all possible imaging chains, and make
    > business cases on hard facts as opposed to just brand value, whether
    > they be AgX, digital, or hybrid.
    >
    > Where imaging chains intertsect or get jumbled I'd like to see them
    > provide open standard solutions and play nice with other provider's.
    > This is where brand value can lead the way.
    >
    > On the TV news I heard they were going to drop digital capture and focus
    > on packaging, printers and software. Still hanging on to AgX capture?
    > Not playing a role in digital cameras, scanners and sensors doesn't seem
    > like someone who wants to take pictures further.
    >
    > --
    > Dale


    As a consumer, I have seen Kodak make some outstandingly stupid
    mistakes that besmirched their reputation. For example, they
    simultaneously marketed two very different types of swellable polymer
    photo paper for dye inkjet printers under the same name, "Kodak Ultima
    Picture Paper." The two types were only identifiable to the customer
    by:

    1. "With Colorlast Technology" on front of package and "select paper
    type UPP-4-A" on back of package.

    2. "Select paper type UPP-3-A" on back of package.

    Type 1 was the BEST swellable polymer paper ever made and Type 2 was
    almost the WORST ever made. Of course, confusion between the two
    types caused many customers to mistakenly buy Type 2 which was prone
    to ink pooling and therefore a complete waste of money. Then Kodak
    stopped making both types.

    Incidentally, I have 8 year old prints made with Type 1 hanging
    uncovered on my wall and they show no signs of deterioration.
     
    aruzinsky, Mar 25, 2012
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Imya Rek

    Cisco headed for bankruptcy

    Imya Rek, Feb 14, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    3,093
    Imya Rek
    Feb 14, 2004
  2. Replies:
    54
    Views:
    5,443
  3. Ramon F Herrera
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    400
    blitz
    May 22, 2007
  4. RichA

    Kodak about to file for bankruptcy protection

    RichA, Jan 5, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    424
    Ray Fischer
    Jan 8, 2012
  5. Dale

    Kodak bankruptcy (again)

    Dale, Apr 26, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    1,054
    Martin Brown
    May 16, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page