Re: define linearization
Re: define linearization
- Subject: Re: define linearization
- From: SKID Photography <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:57:06 -0400
- Organization: SKID Photography
Graeme,
I don't mean to get into a fight about what goes into making a rip and or making a printer and
it's software. I also didn't realize that you had a vested interest in RIPs which explains
your point of view.
Let me put it this way: Do you view the RIP business as an 'elastic' or 'inelastic' business
model?
Some (myself included) say that if one drops the unit price for a RIP, the demand will more
than make up for the lower profit margin.
We all make our own decisions about pricing about our own businesses every day. It's a matter
of opinion as to which is correct. But chances are, that the business that breaks from the
pack (price wise) first ,will win the largest share of the market. Even AOL finally realized
this.
Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC
>
SKID Photography wrote:
>
> Yeah, but with a printer not only have they developed essentially duplicate software
>
> (albeit not as good), they also developed a printer(s), which in itself is a phenomenally
>
> complex machine, you get to keep the printer, and not just a license.
>
>
Yes there is some duplication, but the fact is that building printers is
>
the printer manufacturers area of expertise, and the many attempts
>
they have made at building RIPs have (generally) been ho-hum at the
>
best. The bottom line is that for the vast majority of their customers
>
(who don't have critical color or processing requirements), the drivers
>
supplied with the printer are more than adequate. Why should the printer
>
manufacturer invest resources in stuff that (in its own way) is just as
>
difficult as developing new printer technology, to fulfil the requirements
>
of a small fraction of its customers ?
>
>
If you think that getting software to render documents, correct color
>
and screen the output to the level of quality expected by professional
>
users doesn't constitute a "phenomenally complex machine", then you
>
obviously don't know what's involved. (Last time we counted the lines of
>
source code in our product, it added up to about a million, and that
>
didn't include the postscript interpreter! The most complex machines
>
on this planet are all software. Count the "moving" parts.)
>
>
As for "not just a licence", I don't really follow your point. Though
>
some of the mainstream software vendors have been trying to fiddle
>
licensing conditions recently ("renting" software etc.), for all
>
practical purposes most of the RIP licences are as useful and
>
valuable as an instance of a physical product.
>
You can run it as much as you want, and the essential licensing
>
condition is one the printer manufacturer insists on as well :-
>
don't use the copy of our product you have bought, to make copies
>
and sell to others.
>
>
Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.