No worries. But I think you are missing the point somewhat. He's not
really talking about any individual product but the very tricky task
of finding a quantitative assessment of quality, whatever the
product. (Wine for instance). After that it's a bunfight. Sure we
know lots about cameras but really, how many of us really know much
about comparative assessment of quality and functionality. After all,
most of us are addicted to a marginal product!
Me, I'd wonder why noise isn't a factor for instance as I know that
it is such a problem with so many otherwise fine cameras. Then
there's that 'haptics' concept ascribed to Erwin Puts (er, not Putz,
guys!) How do you measure the 'it just felt right' factor - I claimed
it for the Leica Digilux over the Panasonic version. That's almost
purely subjective but oh so important. 'Haptics' isn't quite the word
anyway from what I can see - it's more like a combination of design
aesthetics, ergonomics and positive prejudice.
As to the prediction of Apple's demise - he was hardly alone there
and I'm one of those entitled to dislike him for it. However, just as
the bumblebee should not be able to fly, Apple should have been in
the toilet by now. The reasons it survived are many and delightfully
various and only go to show that predicting the future is an
impossible task. Surprising how many people making a decent living by
pretending to be able to do it - and only because we insist that they
try.
AndrewF
On 02/03/2006, at 7:30 PM, Winsor Crosby wrote:
> Sorry, Andrew, to jump on your message to rant about Dvorak.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|