Why Kodak, WHY??!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Siddhartha Jain, Dec 6, 2003.

  1. I have two digital cameras. A small-cheap BenQ and an Olympus C-750. I
    take photographs and then plug the camera to the USB port of my laptop
    thats a dual-boot - Windows 2000 SP4 and Redhat Linux 9. Both cameras
    are recognised as drives by both the OSs. No additional driver
    required. That simple.

    I buy a third Kodak 6230 as a gift. I decide to check it out before I
    give it to my friend to make sure everything's alright. The first
    one's flash doesn't work (good I checked). So I get another one from
    the dealer.

    So I excitely start taking photos from the new camera and then plug it
    in to the laptop. Windows says, it discovered a new device and demands
    a driver for it.

    WHY? Why can't Kodak cameras work like other cameras do? My BenQ also
    has internal memory (unlike the Olympus) but that didn't require a

    This means every PC I connect the Kodak to, I must install the
    software to. Now if I am on a vacation:
    1. I either carry my laptop around all the time, or
    2. Carry the CD along all the time and beg the cybercafe owner to let
    me install the software all over the place.

    Anyways, I start installing the Easyshare 3.1 software on my Windows
    2000 SP4. The installation dies mid-way. I send the logs to Kodak tech
    support. Their wise answer, roll-back to SP3 (considering you
    archived) or upgrade to Easyshare 3.2.

    Roll-back? And open my laptop to all sort of vulnerabilities and
    instability, not to mention other softwares that might break.

    Ok, so upgrade. Clickety-clickety-click and click on download software
    on the Kodak site. Its an 18MB download. But what do I see? Its a
    web-installer!! Kodak won't give you the installable in one big file.

    <sarcasm>They just made life easier for me. I don't have to beg the
    cybercafe owner anymore. Just download the 18MB or something software
    everytime I go to a cybercafe or a friend's PC.</sarcasm>

    Ok, back to asking Kodak tech support for the big downloadable. Tech
    support says you need to buy the software from us for $7.95. Now now.
    Lets see, I paid for a working camera. Now I pay more to get it fixed.
    Add to that cost of international shipping and a 10-15 days delay in
    the arrival of the shipment. And after all this, I MUST remember to
    carry the CD around me at all times or carry my laptop everywhere.

    Real solution - Buy a SD card reader. Still, you have to swap the card
    in and out of the camera if you take large number of photos
    (astrophotography or the like). What happens? In hurry, you either
    damage the card or the camera SD card slot. If not in a hurry, then
    over time with frequent opening of the camera SD card slot, you will
    definitely damage either of the three things - the door, the card or
    the slot.

    As a humble customer, may I ask Kodak Inc, WHY? Why couldn't they make
    the camera just like every other vendor does?

    My only consolation is that I won't have to suffer the camera. My
    friend will :)

    Why haven't I commented on the image quality. I have yet get it
    connected to the laptop!!

    Siddhartha Jain, Dec 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Siddhartha Jain

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Kodak isn't alone. Canon cameras can't be seen as an external drive either and
    also require special software.
    Jim Townsend, Dec 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Siddhartha Jain

    anc Guest

    Did you try the Camera on RedHat Linux ? Probably the smart media card will
    be recognised as /dev/sda1 or similar, just like your BenQ and Olympus
    I have an Olympus C4000Z camera, No driver was required by SuSe Linux.
    However on Windows Me it detected a new device and wanted the driver, which
    is supplied on CD by Olympus.
    Perhaps Kodak should provide their driver on the CD like most other camera
    manufactuers. A 17M download (if you dont have broadband) is asking a lot.
    If they just supplied the windows *.inf and/or *.sys files it would be
    easier. I would imagine that they have a bundled software package in the
    anc, Dec 6, 2003
  4. Siddhartha Jain

    Wendy S Guest

    Neither is the Olympus C-2100UZ, although gphoto2 on Linux handles it quite
    nicely. I remember when I got it, it came with some software which (of
    course) wouldn't run on Windows XP and the "fix" was to buy an upgrade to
    the software. No thanks... plug it in on Linux or else use a card reader
    on Windows.
    Wendy S, Dec 6, 2003
  5. Siddhartha Jain

    Jim Townsend Guest

    I use gphoto2 too.. Along with gtkam as a front end. It works with both my
    Canon S100 and 10D.. It even detects the proper camera when I plug it in.

    I still prefer using a card reader. They mount nicely under Linux as well and
    are usually faster at downloading.
    Jim Townsend, Dec 6, 2003
  6. Siddhartha Jain

    Charlie Guest

    Maybe I have missed the point here. While my wife still prefers Easyshare
    and the Dock II for her Kodak CX4230 I have weaned myself away from it and
    uninstalled ES on my PC but left the Dock II for charging and for what I
    call Windows XP "One-Button Transfer".

    I took some snaps with my CX4230 and set the camera in the dock..pressed the
    button and WinXP Wizard came up and set the folder I wanted, transferred the
    images, prompted me to delete the camera's images, and then gave me a
    clickable link to the folder on my c: drive where the images were. I have
    done this on 2 different pc's and no "driver prompt" ever came up.

    Anyway I posted about this "alternate" one touch transfer method in this
    ng...we do like the One Touch to better Pictures when we opt for the Kodak
    Ultima photo paper on my wife's pc.


    Charlie in Mississippi
    (driftin' blues player and gospel picker)
    Charlie, Dec 6, 2003
  7. Siddhartha Jain

    Mark B. Guest

    That's why I got a card reader. Canon cameras are the same way.

    Mark B., Dec 6, 2003
  8. The 300D can be put into PTP mode, which I think is built into many operating
    systems now ... Correct me if I'm wrong.
    Ethan Trewhitt, Dec 6, 2003
  9. Siddhartha Jain

    Ed Kirstein Guest

    For Canon, try this software for downloading.


    It works great with my Olympus and is supposed to work with Canon as well.
    Not sure if it will see a Kodak, but its free so you can try it.

    Ed Kirstein, Dec 6, 2003
  10. Siddhartha Jain

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Yes.. The 300D has the option of two protocols, 'Normal' and 'PTP'.. Normal is
    Canon's proprietary protocol. Canon has been using it for years on most of
    it's models. PTP is a universal protocol that's been recently introduced.
    PTP is a new standard and can be used by all camera manufacturers. WindowsXP
    supports PTP, so if you have a PTP camera it will work on all XP systems with
    no external software.

    But note.. With PTP, you *aren't* looking at the camera's memory card directly
    as you would a floppy disk. PTP stands for picture transfer *protocol*.
    Being a protocol, a set of commands is used to communicate with the camera.

    The operating system must send commands to the camera in order to get it to
    list its contents or transfer files. The firmware in the camera interprets
    these commands and the camera does all the work of handling the images.

    PTP isn't true drag'n'drop since the operating system isn't accessing the
    memory card's file system directly. It's actually the same thing as using
    Canon's proprietary camera protocol.. The ONLY difference is that PTP uses a
    different set of commands, and PTP is pre built into newer operating systems
    so you don't have to load drivers.

    With true drag and drop, the camera presents its memory card in the same manner
    as a card reader and allows the operating system direct access.
    Jim Townsend, Dec 6, 2003
  11. Interesting points, thanks for the insight!
    Ethan Trewhitt, Dec 6, 2003
  12. Siddhartha Jain

    SD Guest

    Well both my cameras look like external USB drives to Windows/Linux and
    they access the file system directly. Whats the point in having this
    extra stuff PTP and propritary things when you can just plug the camera
    and it looks like just another drive which doesnt need drivers.. And
    what about those who dont use XP? they ahve to download PTP support?
    SD, Dec 6, 2003
  13. Siddhartha Jain

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Yes.. It's awkward. I don't know *what* the point is. But Canon and several
    other manufacturers have chosen to do it this way.

    And of course, this was the question in the original post that started this
    thread :) Why does Kodak do this ?

    You do have to install drivers.. The software usually comes on disk with the

    And of course, this was the question in the original posters post.. Why can't
    Kodak do this ?
    Jim Townsend, Dec 6, 2003
  14. Siddhartha Jain

    SD Guest

    Well that and the propritary battery steered me away from canon.. i'm
    happy with my AA battery taking cam..
    SD, Dec 7, 2003
  15. It may be more expensive to buy the proprietary batteries, but they last much
    longer than AAs.
    Ethan Trewhitt, Dec 7, 2003
  16. Siddhartha Jain

    Azzz1588 Guest

    I was wondering the exact same thing ?????

    Less stuff in the systray, is necessary for me, both
    box's are networked together, and gaming on both
    are a necessity for me. (and 18 yr old son)

    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
    Azzz1588, Dec 7, 2003
  17. Siddhartha Jain

    SD Guest

    well AA NiMHs last long enough, I can carry unlimited numbers of them, I
    have a car charger and I can buy regular AAs or CRV3 Lithiums at stores
    in case of battery emergencies.. What exactly do you mean longer? more
    pictures or more overall battery life?
    SD, Dec 7, 2003
  18. Siddhartha Jain

    SD Guest

    Good for you, I have to wait another 25 years to have an 18yr old to
    play games with :)
    SD, Dec 7, 2003
  19. I meant more pictures. The overall life remains to be seen as I haven't had
    any die on me yet (It's at least a year so far). I prefer owning a few
    proprietaries and not having to swap them out as often, but it's really just a
    personal preference at this point. AAs do have the advantage of being
    available if you're in po-dunk and you forgot your extra camera batteries or
    the charger.
    Ethan Trewhitt, Dec 7, 2003
  20. Siddhartha Jain

    Charlie Guest


    Oh yeah? I don't think so. I doubt you could carry 25,000 AA cells let
    alone "an unlimited number". How some folks dress up their vernacular to try
    to sneak some influence and persuasion in under the door to the naive reader
    and lend inordinate credibility to a lost cause. Sheeeesh........

    Get real pal..OK??? Some of us actually read these posts with some hope of
    acquiring helpful tips or sharing same. Your superlative bs is just that.

    Have a Blessed Advent Season - and that "is Real" !!

    Charlie in Mississippi
    (driftin' blues player and gospel picker)
    Charlie, Dec 7, 2003
    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.