better Kodak reorganization

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dale, May 6, 2013.

  1. [Followup-to: rec.photo.darkroom]

    Alfred Molon:
    What is the exact model of your scanner? Asking in
    the hope that, maybe, you could sell it me, if it's
    working and little used. Feel free to reply e-mail.
     
    Anton Shepelev, May 9, 2013
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alfred Molon:
    Seems so to me :-(
     
    Anton Shepelev, May 9, 2013
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. I am not saying that. I am saying that mismanagement was the major
    factor in the decline of AT&T. The latter-day management had no vision
    of what the company could be. They played catch-up with the competition,
    so were always behind in product offerings. They bought stuff from China
    and wondered why Western Electric (later spun into Lucent) had trouble
    selling stuff. Their hardware and software in central office equipment
    was sloppy and unmanageable, so operating companies started buying stuff
    like that from Siemans and Ericcson instead. When they were finally
    allowed to make computers for other purposes than just driving
    electronic central offices, they mismanaged that so badly that they
    decided to stop that and to buy an existing computer company instead.
    They chose National Cash Register, not because they made great
    computers, but because they were cheap. After a few years of mismanaging
    NCR, they spun it off at half the price they paid for it because they
    had messed it up so bad. The Sadim touch (opposite of Midas), where
    everything they touched turned to $hit.

    I am saying (now; I did not say this in my post) that losing that
    lawsuit was a really great opportunity for the AT&T, and they wasted
    that opportunity completely.

    Getting rid of the 7 operating companies meant getting rid of the high
    cost, labor intensive, regulated, low-profit local telephone service
    part of the business, and keeping Bell Labs, Western Electric, Long
    Lines, the defense business, and so on. These were all capital
    intensive, low labor cost, high profit parts of the business. They would
    also get rid of a lot of the overhead and excess management of running
    the operating companies, so the remaining management could take care of
    running the remaining business.

    And the Operating Companies also messed up their opportunity. Bell Labs
    was split into two parts, one retained by AT&T, and one jointly owned by
    the 7 operating companies (BellCore). BellCore could have cut the
    thickness of one 6 or 7 inch thick book of rules and regulations to
    about 2 inches (The G.E.I.), but they did not. They had all the same bad
    management as the AT&T part had. And since the operating companies did
    not manufacture anything, they had trouble supporting BellCore
    financially since they could not justify it to all the Public Utility
    Commissions. So they didn't support it. I do not know if BellCore even
    exists anymore. There are descendants of descendants of BellCore but
    just as the present AT&T has little in common with the old one, the
    present descendant has little to do with communication research.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, May 9, 2013
    #23
  4. Alfred Molon:
    Oh, and I needed a one that'd accept 120 film. The
    prices are indeed insane. The thread talks about
    Kodak fighting with digital but isn't Nikon fighting
    with film by discountinuing so highly-demanded a
    product?
     
    Anton Shepelev, May 9, 2013
    #24
  5. It's not a high demand product. It's a long dead product that a few people
    want to have and are willing to pay a high price for.

    Nikon can't make a profit selling 100 scanners. They would have to sell
    thousands of them and the demand is not that high.

    In 20 years there probably will be a resurgence of film scanning from
    people finding old family negatives in the attic when their parents
    or grandparents die.

    By then I expect that the scanner will take a strip of film, automatically
    determine best focus and exposure, split the frames, correct color, remove
    dust, and do facial and place recognition to tag it.

    However I doubt that there will be much demand for an "artistic" scanner
    which just does a straight scan such as the current ones.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, May 9, 2013
    #25
  6. Geoffrey S. Mendelson:
    Whence did you take that fact? My reasoning for a
    high demand was the following:

    1. Nikon ran out of stock of its scanners soon
    after it had discontinued them.

    2. The prices on them on eBay and elsewhere
    started to grow not many years later, as it is
    with collectable items, but again, almost im-
    mediately.

    3. I have seen a lot of people complain about
    this on various forums, and considering that
    only a small portion of the interested takes
    care to express their concerns, there seems to
    be a lot of them.

    A true example of low demand is our Krasnogorsk film
    cameras, and specificlly the Zenit 122:

    http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Zenit_122
    http://www.cameramanuals.org/russian_pdf/zenit_122.pdf

    I visited KMZ's shop and exhibition center just the
    day before yesterday and was quite amazed to find
    new 122s sold for just 1650 rubles, or 55 dollars!
    And that's for a good mechanical camera with a TTL
    light meter and a very good Zenitar 2/50 lens
    -- that's low demand, for a camera that has long
    been discountinued. With Nikon film scanners the
    situation is different.
    I just hate when a device insists on doing more than
    I want from it. If those functions will be bypass-
    able, that will be all right by me. I care more
    about how well a scanner does its main job, and am
    unwilling to pay for other loosely related features,
    so I find this whole trend a negative one. And col-
    or correction may be quite a subjective thing. Cor-
    recting colors in Photoshop after the scanner soft-
    ware has already corrected them at its will, proba-
    bly destroying color integrity:

    http://www.c-f-systems.com/ColorIntegrity.html

    is at least ugly. I don't want to correct a correc-
    tion.
     
    Anton Shepelev, May 9, 2013
    #26
  7. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    So what? Your discussioin of color spaces has nothing to do with
    anything that I said or with the problem I see in that image.
     
    J. Clarke, May 9, 2013
    #27
  8. Dale

    PeterN Guest

    A prime example of the inherent flaw of the B school game, taught in
    every B school.
     
    PeterN, May 9, 2013
    #28
  9. Dale

    PeterN Guest

    See my prior post. It was not. The problem is when you put money into
    research and development, it adversely impacts the bottom line, for
    accounting purposes. Lower bottom line = lower bonuses for management.
     
    PeterN, May 9, 2013
    #29
  10. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    Well then you are saying that that the lawsuit was not the major factor
    so why did you say that you were not saying that?
    They had no choice. The Justice Department decided what it could be.
    They had no competition until the lawsuit.
    "Selling stuff" was a small part of their business.
    There were no "Operating Companies" until after the lawsuit.
    They wouldn't have had to make computers for any other purpose without
    the lawsuit.
    Only if you want them to be something other than what they were, the
    telephone company.
    Except that they were not allowed to keep Western Electric or Bell Labs.
    And they lost their monopoly on long-distance as well which meant that
    their resources were far less than they had been.
    How was this an "opportunity"?
    And all due to the lawsuit.

    Every single "problem" you list is the result of the actions of MCI's
    lawyers.
     
    J. Clarke, May 9, 2013
    #30
  11. J. Clarke:
    I thought that the defect you talk about is that of
    the scanner software rather than hardware. What do
    you mean by "out of register"?
     
    Anton Shepelev, May 9, 2013
    #31
  12. I said that the lawsuit was not a major factor in the breakup. The
    company was mismanaged seriously starting around 1970 any you cannot
    blame that on a lawsuit later. AT&T did not learn the lesson of the
    Carterphone decision years before and it was downhill ever since.
    That breakup was negotiated between AT&T and the Justice Department. It
    made things simpler for both sides. AT&T did not think they could get
    away with unloading the operating companies and keep the high profit
    stuff. The Justice Department did not really understand that and just
    accepted things.
    Sure there was. What became SPRINT was around. It was a private network
    for the Southern Pacific Railroad, in direct competition with Long Lines.
    Selling stuff was the Entire business of Western Electric. They sold all
    the equipment the operating companies used except maybe toilet paper and
    Scotch Tape. Central Offices, PBXs, telephones, wire, ...
    If I remember correctly, there were 22 operating companies before. E.g.,
    New England Bell, New York Telephone, New Jersey Bell, Chesapeake and
    Potomac, Southern Bell, South Central Bell, South Western Bell,
    Sure they would. They used lots of computers internally, and they wanted
    to sell them. They were early pioneers in making computers even before
    WW-II. They made of the first transistorized computers. About that time,
    in an earlier case, the Justice Department made them stop making
    computers, and the teams working on them were broken up, partly by mass
    resignations of people who went to work for independent computer
    manufacturers.
    They were much much more than a telephone company. They engaged in much
    fundamental research only tangentially related to telephones. For
    example, Davisson and Germer's discovery that electrons were both waves
    and particles (Nobel prize in physics), Ives' discovery of retardation
    of atomic clocks, invention of transistor instead of just making better
    telephone relays, ...

    RCA had a similar problem at Sarnoff Research Center. The bean counters
    did not realize how important research was (as contrasted to short-term
    product development) and wanted to close it down to improve short term
    profits. Now RCA is no more. They had to get out of the computer
    business even though they knew it was their future. They realized that a
    large proportion of their products were the results of work done in the
    previous 10 years at Sarnoff, but the bean counters won.
    AT&T was allowed to keep Western Electric and Bell Labs. And they did
    keep both until years later when they spun off Verizon, and Verizon got
    them. That did not work out well and Alcatel bought Verizon, and now
    Alcatel is not doing well.
    BellCore could have dumped the unwhieldy G.E.I, streamlined management,
    and managed the company. They could have become the leaders they once
    were back when AT&T was well managed by people like Vail. But instead
    they got Charlie Brown and Robert Allen.
    Nonsense. They played a part, but AT&T would have fallen apart
    regardless. It might have taken a little longer.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, May 9, 2013
    #32
  13. Dale

    Martin Brown Guest

    It is most obvious in the green inner fringes on highlights in
    the left of the image, but also present as green inner and purple
    outer fringes on highlights in the right top corner. Most easily
    seen in the trees just past the roof line of the barn. Zoom in...

    Looks to me like uncorrected lateral colour aberration.
    (ie a lens used to take the image flaw)

    Put simply the green image is slightly smaller than red and blue!
    I don't see how this can be a scanner fault.
     
    Martin Brown, May 9, 2013
    #33
  14. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    While you can accuse AT&T of many things, giving research short shrift
    is not one of them. Their research department produced Unix, the C
    programming language, the laser, the transistor, the CCD, and 7 Nobel
    Prizes, and all of that was in addition to the work that actually
    affected the bottom line.
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #34
  15. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    Now that is a fine piece of revisionism.
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #35
  16. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    How did it go about competing when there was no way to get a phone call
    onto SPRINT's lines other than through AT&T?
    After the lawsuit.
    All subsidiaries of AT&T.
    Which would be moving away from their core competency.
    Do tell us about the computer that AT&T made before WWII.
    They were the telephone company. That was their core competency.
    A couple of posts earlier you said they neglected research. You're
    talking out of both sides of your mouth here.
    The entire US consumer electronics industry is no more, why single out
    RCA?
    How could they "become the leaders" when the entire structure of the
    company had been destroyed by the government and all that was left to
    them was to compete for long distance?
    Perhaps it would, perhaps it wouldn't. We'll never know because it was
    destroyed by the lawyers.

    Note that AT&T is still around. The bastards that sued them aren't.
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #36
  17. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    Look on the left side of the picture. You'll see a stick. Look
    closely. You'll see the green part of the image of that stick displaced
    far enough from the red and green that there is a visible gap between
    them. That's not a software problem.
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #37
  18. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    Filing a lawsuit against AT*T so that MCI could make more profits is not
    a "result".
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #38
  19. Balony. They sold stuff even before they were purchased by AT&T way back
    in the fogs of time.
    That was Western Electric's only reason for existance (except for
    defense contracting military systems such as the M-33 fire control
    system, the Nike missile systems, Safeguard anti-ballistic missile
    system, ...). AT&T did not keep them around as a hobby. They made all
    the equipment used by the 22 operating companies for most of a century.
    My father can lick your father.
    That company was in business over 100 years. The deterioration, as it
    seemed to me at the time, started in the early 1970s, although it
    probably was already happening at the time of the Carterphone decision.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carterfone

    For decades, they were possibly the premier technical research
    laboratory in the world. For decades, they were getting a patent a day.
    And 13 Nobel prizes. They did not get them for the Princess telephone.

    From about 1925 until I left at the end of 1989, the Bell Labs
    presidents had a pretty good idea of the importance of basic research,
    for example. Problems ensued when AT&T and Western Electric (joint
    owners of Bell Labs) got too interested in short-term development and
    did not understand that basic research was the future. Bell Labs'
    charter ensured that both basic research and product development were
    done. It is my impression that basic research was about 10% of what was
    done there, and development was around 75% or so. Then in the 1980s,
    some badly understood work was started on a huge scale, gobbling up
    resources including management attention. President of Bell Labs was a
    big deal until about then, but the bean counters at AT&T did not
    understand research (or even development, actually), and things went to
    hell.

    Think about the economy of the United States and how Bell Labs affected
    it. If Brattain, Bardeen, and Shockley had been told to design better
    relay contacts, and if they did not quit, they would have designed
    better relay contacts. Instead, they were interested in the physics of
    the solid state. What has that to do with telephones? They just invented
    the transistor, that's all. It is true that AT&T never made a success at
    manufacturing transistors, but companies like Texas Instruments,
    Fairchild, RCA, Philco, and a few others made a success of it. Changed
    the economy of the whole world. Now there is a computer in my cell
    phone, several computers in my car, ... . That cell phone has more
    compute power than the IBM 704 I first used in the late 1950s that cost
    $680/ an hour to rent and required two trained operators per shift to
    run it.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, May 10, 2013
    #39
  20. Dale

    J. Clarke Guest

    So you're saying that somehow MCI just conveniently filed suit and the
    Justice Department conveniently ruled on exactly the scheduled that AT&T
    wanted?
     
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2013
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.