Kodak not so Easyshare revisited

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jo Westcott, Oct 12, 2006.

  1. Jo Westcott

    Jo Westcott Guest

    All the info I read from the web was about people who had changed to a
    Kodak camera and after installing software, had difficulty with email
    attachments not opening. An error message appeared about not being
    able to complete the action.... go to control panel to create an
    association... I did not have this difficulty until I bought a Dell
    Inspiron with Windows XP. My aging IBM with Windows ME handled the
    Kodak software for my DX7590 camera(2003) and the email attachments
    just fine, and still does. Based on the trouble shooting I have done
    with calls to Dell and my ISP as well as comparing the Folder Options
    configurations of both computers I have come to the conclusion that the
    problem lies with the Kodak/Windows XP combination. The notes from
    Nemo, Smudger,KennyJr, Ron Hunter, and Tom were invaluable. I did not
    call Kodak for I knew they would not be helpful if I told them the
    software was opening attachments on one of my computers. There is one
    option left to me before I uninstall the Kodak software to use the XP
    photo options. I live near Rochester NY and know someone who works in
    the development of EasyShare software. I intend to pick his brains and
    will pass on what I learn if anyone is interested.
     
    Jo Westcott, Oct 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jo Westcott

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the photography
    business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out mediocre products at
    best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who don't know how crappy
    Kodak has become.

    If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you go
    Kodak.

    R


    "Jo Westcott" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > All the info I read from the web was about people who had changed to a
    > Kodak camera and after installing software, had difficulty with email
    > attachments not opening. An error message appeared about not being
    > able to complete the action.... go to control panel to create an
    > association... I did not have this difficulty until I bought a Dell
    > Inspiron with Windows XP. My aging IBM with Windows ME handled the
    > Kodak software for my DX7590 camera(2003) and the email attachments
    > just fine, and still does. Based on the trouble shooting I have done
    > with calls to Dell and my ISP as well as comparing the Folder Options
    > configurations of both computers I have come to the conclusion that the
    > problem lies with the Kodak/Windows XP combination. The notes from
    > Nemo, Smudger,KennyJr, Ron Hunter, and Tom were invaluable. I did not
    > call Kodak for I knew they would not be helpful if I told them the
    > software was opening attachments on one of my computers. There is one
    > option left to me before I uninstall the Kodak software to use the XP
    > photo options. I live near Rochester NY and know someone who works in
    > the development of EasyShare software. I intend to pick his brains and
    > will pass on what I learn if anyone is interested.
    >
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Oct 13, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jo Westcott

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    > What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the photography
    > business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out mediocre products at
    > best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who don't know how crappy
    > Kodak has become.
    >
    > If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you go
    > Kodak.
    >
    > R
    >
    >


    >
    >


    Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing
    power, and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than
    you probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one does.
    I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.
     
    Ron Hunter, Oct 13, 2006
    #3
  4. Jo Westcott

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    No I insult Kodak for thinking that people don't know any better. For years
    Kodak put plastic lenses in their cameras, they didn't think their customers
    deserved glass. Kodak has always put out the bottom of the link cameras and
    because of all of the marketing speak most consumers don't know any better.
    Most still don't know the difference between optical zoom and digital zoom
    and Kodak prays on that.

    Don't get me wrong I like the V610, but it isn't what I would call a medium
    or high end camera. Kodak tends to go the Microsoft Office Paperclip route
    for things. They want it cute and cuddly instead of good and powerful.

    R


    "Ron Hunter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    >> What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the
    >> photography business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out
    >> mediocre products at best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who
    >> don't know how crappy Kodak has become.
    >>
    >> If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you go
    >> Kodak.
    >>
    >> R
    >>
    >>

    >
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    > legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing power,
    > and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than you
    > probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one does.
    > I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    > them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    > bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Oct 13, 2006
    #4
  5. Jo Westcott

    John Turco Guest

    Ron Hunter wrote:
    >
    > Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    > > What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the photography
    > > business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out mediocre products at
    > > best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who don't know how crappy
    > > Kodak has become.
    > >
    > > If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you go
    > > Kodak.
    > >
    > > R
    > >
    > >

    >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    > legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing
    > power, and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than
    > you probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one does.
    > I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    > them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    > bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.



    Hello, Ron:

    If "Hebee Jeebes" is sincere in his rant, he's suffering from memory
    loss, apparently. Here's a quote from his newsgroup reply of 8-21-06,
    in the "kodak v610 bluetooth transfers" thread:

    "I have this camera and a Bluetooth adapter from Belkin and haven't
    been able to get transfers to work either.

    I agree it is a very nice little camera. I like it a lot."

    So, I guess the Kodak V610 doesn't qualify as a "toy camera," then?


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Oct 14, 2006
    #5
  6. Jo Westcott

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    Yes. One camera out of how many? Even Kodak can hit it lucky once a decade.
    I have looked at 8 others from Kodak and find none of them worth beans. The
    V610 is nice for what it is. Extreme zoom is a small package. If the camera
    had been larger it would have been junk. The small fit in your pocket size
    with the 10X optical zoom is "THE ONLY THING" that saved it.

    R


    "John Turco" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Ron Hunter wrote:
    >>
    >> Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    >> > What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the
    >> > photography
    >> > business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out mediocre
    >> > products at
    >> > best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who don't know how
    >> > crappy
    >> > Kodak has become.
    >> >
    >> > If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you
    >> > go
    >> > Kodak.
    >> >
    >> > R
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >> Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    >> legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing
    >> power, and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than
    >> you probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one
    >> does.
    >> I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    >> them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    >> bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.

    >
    >
    > Hello, Ron:
    >
    > If "Hebee Jeebes" is sincere in his rant, he's suffering from memory
    > loss, apparently. Here's a quote from his newsgroup reply of 8-21-06,
    > in the "kodak v610 bluetooth transfers" thread:
    >
    > "I have this camera and a Bluetooth adapter from Belkin and haven't
    > been able to get transfers to work either.
    >
    > I agree it is a very nice little camera. I like it a lot."
    >
    > So, I guess the Kodak V610 doesn't qualify as a "toy camera," then?
    >
    >
    > Cordially,
    > John Turco <>
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Oct 14, 2006
    #6
  7. In article <>,
    Ron Hunter <> wrote:

    > Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    > > What's do you expect. Kodak hasn't been a real top player in the
    > > photography
    > > business since film started to die off. Kodak puts out mediocre products at
    > > best designed for the mom and pop and aunt Ethel who don't know how crappy
    > > Kodak has become.
    > >
    > > If you want a real camera, it isn't Kodak. If you want a toy, then you go
    > > Kodak.
    > >
    > > R
    > >
    > >

    >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    > legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing
    > power, and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than
    > you probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one does.
    > I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    > them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    > bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.


    Like it or not, Kodak's consumer line of digital cameras is crap. I
    can't comment on their pro-lineup because I've never seen a pro use a
    digital Kodak.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Oct 17, 2006
    #7
  8. Jo Westcott

    mrsgator88 Guest

    Having used Kodak P&S cameras, I'd have to disagree. At least the ones with
    Schneider lenses.

    S

    > Like it or not, Kodak's consumer line of digital cameras is crap. I
    > can't comment on their pro-lineup because I've never seen a pro use a
    > digital Kodak.
     
    mrsgator88, Oct 18, 2006
    #8
  9. Jo Westcott

    John Turco Guest

    Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >
    > In article <>,
    > Ron Hunter <> wrote:


    <edited, for brevity>

    > > Kodak has chosen to cater to a market you regard as something less than
    > > legitimate. You insult millions of people with a lot of purchasing
    > > power, and many with more photography experience, and knowledge, than
    > > you probably have. If Kodak doesn't make 'real' cameras, then no one does.
    > > I have been using their cameras for over half a century, and have found
    > > them reliable, usable, and the pictures generally above average. Your
    > > bias seems to be based on factors not relating to the real world.

    >
    > Like it or not, Kodak's consumer line of digital cameras is crap.


    Hello, Kevin:

    Prove it!

    >I
    > can't comment on their pro-lineup because I've never seen a pro use a
    > digital Kodak.


    So, that means they don't exist? For your information, Kodak came out
    with the first "professional" DSLR, the NC2000e - based on the Nikon
    N90 (F90) film SLR - in 1994. It was 1.3MP, available only from the AP
    (Associated Press), and went for a whopping $17,950 USD!

    Kodak abandoned the DSLR market, in 2005, when it decided to introduce
    its "P" (for "performance") line of "super zoom" digicams, which
    includes my P850 (12x).

    Incidentally, Kodak DSLR's fetch rather high prices, on eBay, today.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Oct 22, 2006
    #9
  10. Jo Westcott

    John Turco Guest

    mrsgator88 wrote:
    >
    > Having used Kodak P&S cameras, I'd have to disagree. At least the ones with
    > Schneider lenses.
    >
    > S



    Hello,

    Kodak's own "Ektanar" lenses are just as good, from what I've read, in
    online reviews.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>


    > > Like it or not, Kodak's consumer line of digital cameras is crap. I
    > > can't comment on their pro-lineup because I've never seen a pro use a
    > > digital Kodak.
     
    John Turco, Oct 22, 2006
    #10
  11. Jo Westcott

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    > No I insult Kodak for thinking that people don't know any better. For years
    > Kodak put plastic lenses in their cameras, they didn't think their customers
    > deserved glass. Kodak has always put out the bottom of the link cameras and
    > because of all of the marketing speak most consumers don't know any better.
    > Most still don't know the difference between optical zoom and digital zoom
    > and Kodak prays on that.
    >
    > Don't get me wrong I like the V610, but it isn't what I would call a medium
    > or high end camera. Kodak tends to go the Microsoft Office Paperclip route
    > for things. They want it cute and cuddly instead of good and powerful.
    >
    > R


    Kodak services a specific market segment, and does it well. On can't
    put expensive glass in an inexpensive consumer camera and expect to
    continue in business. There are other companies that cater to those
    other market segments, and do it well. Because you prefer the other
    market segments, and have little use for the cheaper cameras, doesn't
    mean Kodak isn't doing the job they have chosen well. In fact, I have
    found that they do this well, and have for at least the 55 years I have
    been actively taking pictures. I have owned many Kodak cameras and have
    found all of them to work as advertised (some much better than
    expected), and have never had a problem with ANY of them. Yes, they
    cater to a market segment that isn't knowledgeable, but do you contend
    that people who don't know, or care, what shutter priority, or depth of
    field are have no right to cameras? Seems a rather egocentric attitude,
    don't you think?
     
    Ron Hunter, Oct 23, 2006
    #11
  12. Jo Westcott

    John Turco Guest

    Ron Hunter wrote:
    >
    > Hebee Jeebes wrote:
    > > No I insult Kodak for thinking that people don't know any better. For years
    > > Kodak put plastic lenses in their cameras, they didn't think their customers
    > > deserved glass. Kodak has always put out the bottom of the link cameras and
    > > because of all of the marketing speak most consumers don't know any better.
    > > Most still don't know the difference between optical zoom and digital zoom
    > > and Kodak prays on that.
    > >
    > > Don't get me wrong I like the V610, but it isn't what I would call a medium
    > > or high end camera. Kodak tends to go the Microsoft Office Paperclip route
    > > for things. They want it cute and cuddly instead of good and powerful.
    > >
    > > R

    >
    > Kodak services a specific market segment, and does it well. On can't
    > put expensive glass in an inexpensive consumer camera and expect to
    > continue in business. There are other companies that cater to those
    > other market segments, and do it well. Because you prefer the other
    > market segments, and have little use for the cheaper cameras, doesn't
    > mean Kodak isn't doing the job they have chosen well. In fact, I have
    > found that they do this well, and have for at least the 55 years I have
    > been actively taking pictures. I have owned many Kodak cameras and have
    > found all of them to work as advertised (some much better than
    > expected), and have never had a problem with ANY of them. Yes, they
    > cater to a market segment that isn't knowledgeable, but do you contend
    > that people who don't know, or care, what shutter priority, or depth of
    > field are have no right to cameras? Seems a rather egocentric attitude,
    > don't you think?



    Hello, Ron:

    All mainstream digicam manufacturers, "cater to a market segment that
    isn't knowledgeable," more or less. Even Canon and Nikon churn out
    endless point & shoot models, as they're probably both companies'
    "meat-and-potatoes," while DSLR's are most likely their "gravy."

    Unfortunately, I doubt that anybody will ever convince those
    close-minded, "Hebee Jeebes" types of cynics, that Kodak has done the
    best job of capturing (pun intended) the P&S market, traditionally.

    First, it was film, and now, it's digital. Kodak all the way, baby! <g>


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Oct 27, 2006
    #12
  13. Jo Westcott

    rEn Guest

    Lou Diamond Phillips Couldnt have said it better.........!


    > First, it was film, and now, it's digital. Kodak all the way, baby! <g>
    >
    >
    > Cordially,
    > John Turco <>
     
    rEn, Oct 28, 2006
    #13
    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. Greg Kamer

    Kodak EasyShare email not working right

    Greg Kamer, Dec 9, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    4,377
  2. Arvind

    Kodak Easyshare: "Add pictures" does not work

    Arvind, Jan 26, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    2,793
    Ron Baird
    Feb 6, 2004
  3. Emile Leche

    kodak software problems...revisited

    Emile Leche, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    535
    Paige Miller
    Jan 31, 2004
  4. JR Berry

    Kodak EasyShare Shutdown Problem for Kodak 4530

    JR Berry, Jun 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,352
  5. Ron Baird
    Replies:
    28
    Views:
    736
    JSN61
    Jan 10, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page