Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Keith A Walker who wrote (7629)	10/14/1999 9:13:00 AM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Keith, I have touted CF as a disruptive innovation, so I am just as guilty as Art here. I think film and digital can peacefully coexist, but my money is on digital. Kodak's investment in Imation and Nova should be enough proof for you! Ausdauer

To: Keith A Walker who wrote (7629)	10/14/1999 9:50:00 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 60323

Keith, you raise a very interesting point on whether SNDK got too high, particularly when there are performance problems with digital cameras, which don't exist with conventional cameras. I agree to a degree. First, there is just no way that I can see my Nikon 950 replacing my Olympus OM-1 and its magnificent 90 mm macro portrait lens. The very fact that a digital camera cannot react instantly to the press of the shutter release button means that the photographer is preempted from capturing the fleeting moment (provided his eye is good enough to recognize it). Second, the problems that afflict digital cameras being sold today can be solved. Once I switched from alkaline batteries to NiMH rechargeables, I not only experienced very adequate battery life, but also a semi-permanent way to deal with the whole battery problem. I bought 8 batteries and a charger for $34.95, allowing me to keep one fully charged set to replace the other. That's not a big deal when the camera itself costs almost $1,000. Third, I believe I reported Harari's enthusiasm accurately, and I believe it is prophetic. What he is saying is that the person who accepts the quality of conventional point and shoot cameras (which is quite good, given all the automatic focusing, etc.) will see that digital comes close to that standard for prints up to about 4 x 6 inches, or in other words, for the kind of product that now comes from most photofinishers. People will come to realize that the ability to crop the image and present it in print form the way THEY (not the photofinisher) want it will ensure the success of the digital camera and accompanying printer. I can understand why any Kodak employee would be concerned over this development, since Kodak's main strategy still centers around bringing film (or even digital images) to a photofinisher for processing, printing, e-mailing, or whatever. The activities coming after the picture has been snapped WILL DEFINITELY, in my view, become central to the consumer's interest, as opposed to the Kodak strategy. If Harari has similar beliefs, it's no wonder that he can be enthusiastic and predict that digital will obsolete conventional cameras in five years. The sooner Kodak recognizes this fundamental change in photography, going back to George Eastman's philosophy (You take the picture; we do the rest), the sooner Kodak will be able to recover and maintain its preeminence in imaging. Art