Hi Tom So after all the discussion on this area, the question to you is, do companies such as Eizo and NEC have SDK's for the new X Rite display profiling devices, and if not, when? Regards Paul Sherfield The Missing Horse Consultancy Ltd New telephone number: 00 44 1442 207626 Mobile: 00 44 7899 906385 Fax: 0872 111 7709 http://www.missinghorsecons.co.uk Follow us on: Twitter.com/missinghorse Apple Solutions Expert - Print & Publishing Member - UK TC130 Technical Advisory Group (ISO 12647 Printing Standards) UK Expert: ISO TC130/Working Group 13 on certification of printing standards Chair – BPIF UK ISO 12647 Certification Steering Group Member - BPIF Technical Standards Committee Lean and green? To save money and become a greener printer, see http://www.greenprinter.co.uk http://www.keeconsultants.com Reduce your carbon footprint http://www.1010uk.org This email and any attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any disclosure, copying or other distribution is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies from your system. Email may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment. We do not accept liability for any such corruption, interception or amendment or the consequences thereof. We do not accept liability for any action or inaction by the recipient as a result of advice or information contained within this email.
From: "colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com" <colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com> Reply-To: "colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:34:30 -0700 (PDT) To: "colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 8, Issue 186
Send Colorsync-users mailing list submissions to colorsync-users@lists.apple.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com
You can reach the person managing the list at colorsync-users-owner@lists.apple.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Colorsync-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support (Tom Lianza) 2. Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support (MARK SEGAL) 3. Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support (Tom Lianza) 4. Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support (MARK SEGAL) 5. Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support (Jan-Peter Homann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:55:03 -0400 From: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support To: Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>, Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>, Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Message-ID: <CA73E377.AA6A%tlianza@xrite.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
To all,
It's hard to respond to so many erroneous opinions at one time, but I will make some general comments.
1. OEM products. When an OEM purchases a product from us, it is their product. There may be manufacturing differences, there may be firmware differences. Most important, X-rite cannot make a change to the product without specific agreement with the OEM. We can, and often do, make changes in the retail line of products. OEMs make specific volume commitments and often invest a significant amount of R&D and supply chain cost to implement the product in their product line. They also service the product. Some display vendors put the calibration software in the display. They have every right to insist on absolute customization. When I designed the Sony Artisan hardware I had to use a completely different strategy for suppression of static because their standards exceeded the FCC and European standards of the time. We also had to re-engineer the cable so that the insulation could be physically consumed. This required a change in the production techniques of the cable and very specific testing for impurities. OEM's invest heavily in their products and they need to protect that investment. They are not screwing the consumer. Comments like that indicate a total ignorance of the position that OEM's are in.
2. The small developer- Independent developers are an important part of our business. The question is: who supports the hardware product? A developer like Graeme Gill "cracks" our products at "arm's length". In the US, this is completely legal and has been defended in court many times (the DOS BIOS is a good example of how this worked). He applies his technology to a product that was legally purchased through retail channels. What would be illegal would be to make copies of our software and sell it using the cracked technology or to ship our drivers, unlicensed, to the field. In the life a given hardware product, independent software developers will make many upgrades and not all of them will be free. We make money on hardware once, and that piece of hardware is an "enabler" for many other companies over the course of its lifetime.
I believe that there will be a mechanism for independent developers to use the latest technology colorimeter, purchased through retail channels, but I need to confirm that. Understand that the latest technology products are significantly different than the earlier products and do require a certain amount of training to implement properly. It's not in anyone's best interest to open the technology to everyone who thinks they are a developer until we understand the support and training costs. Not everyone is a Karl or Graeme. Is it in the consumers best interests to have poor software implementations of new hardware technology? Should we make exceptions for certain developers who may have the knowledge and not allow other developers into the fray? How do we make sure that an iSV product doesn't kill a retail product by overlaying different dll's or packages? How do we cover release of information that is currently under application for patent? How do we inform ISV's of changes that are warranted by changes in operating systems. How do we justify the costs of system support to the ISV community given that we make money only on the sale of the hardware item? There is nothing nefarious here, it just takes time and resources which are not available at the moment.
Third hand comments about internal corporate policy (which, by the way is probably covered by NDA) such as those from Mr Wagner, should not generate the frenzy of nonsense that we have seen on this list. Snarky and uninformed comments like those of Mr. Segal add nothing to a solution to the issues of ISV support. I hope that you all have a better understanding of the situation and we can end this mindless thread started with third hand information taken out of the context of reality.....
Regards, Tom Lianza
On 8/19/11 6:25 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <info@pigment-print.com> wrote:
On 08/19/2011 09:57 AM, Karl Koch wrote:
*snip*
If the communication interface for the Dreamcolor versions could be cracked I suppose that ccmxmake could adapt the filtering sufficiently for other monitor types. There may even be some experience on adaption with the NEC variety.
<irony> I´m not quite sure, cracking software or communication interfaces is quite legal</irony> Looks like that´s what had happened in ccmxmake, bt it can well be that Argyll has permission to do so.
Let me rephrase that to: "an alternative driver created for".
*snip*
The current policy is bad for consumers and is anticompetitive.
I don´t think so! On the contrary: This policy (with which I don´t agree either, but it´s X-Rite´s decision and none of my business) will encourage competitors to develop, manufacture and sell new instruments without these restrictions. And thus we will have a competitive situation not only in the field of software, but also in hardware. This will break X-Rite´s monopoly – and they have begged for it ;-)
My thoughts too. Too much good CM software around that needs compatible hardware. What came to the surface in hard- and software so far from the GM + M + X merges is not convincing. Including more restrictions on its use + applying absurd new restrictions on the software it had to replace. What looked like a potential monopolist some years ago could be a niche player soon enough with this policy. A policy that Apple might exploit successfully but not X-rite.
A redesign of for example the SpectroCam could have a bright future, bundling it with a nice colorimeter for monitor calibration would overcome the US patent issue too. Add something like Argyll's ccmxmake and that bundle delivers more than the sum of two devices. Barbieri is still alive, the Spyder colorimeters improved a lot and with a Chinese CM software company running now it would be surprising if there would not appear some hardware from that part of the world too.
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments.
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:19:10 -0700 (PDT) From: MARK SEGAL <mgsegal@rogers.com> Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support To: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com>, Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>, Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>, "Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Message-ID: <1313763550.55032.YahooMailNeo@web88603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
"Reality" is perceived by different people in different ways depending on, amongst other things, at which end of the spectrum they happen to sit, what their interests are, and how these matters affect them personally. While some peoples' reality is other peoples' snark, we'll see over time which perspective prevails.And if there is really critical misinformation out here, maybe the company needs to do more to correct that. Over the years of corporate history, the demise of bigger fish than XRite started when they just couldn't truly and seriously see beyond themselves and their self-perceived immediate interests.
Mark
________________________________ From: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> To: Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>; Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>; Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 9:55:03 AM Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
To all,
It's hard to respond to so many erroneous opinions at one time, but I will make some general comments.
1. OEM products. When an OEM purchases a product from us, it is their product. There may be manufacturing differences, there may be firmware differences. Most important, X-rite cannot make a change to the product without specific agreement with the OEM. We can, and often do, make changes in the retail line of products. OEMs make specific volume commitments and often invest a significant amount of R&D and supply chain cost to implement the product in their product line. They also service the product. Some display vendors put the calibration software in the display. They have every right to insist on absolute customization. When I designed the Sony Artisan hardware I had to use a completely different strategy for suppression of static because their standards exceeded the FCC and European standards of the time. We also had to re-engineer the cable so that the insulation could be physically consumed. This required a change in the production techniques of the cable and very specific testing for impurities. OEM's invest heavily in their products and they need to protect that investment. They are not screwing the consumer. Comments like that indicate a total ignorance of the position that OEM's are in.
2. The small developer- Independent developers are an important part of our business. The question is: who supports the hardware product? A developer like Graeme Gill "cracks" our products at "arm's length". In the US, this is completely legal and has been defended in court many times (the DOS BIOS is a good example of how this worked). He applies his technology to a product that was legally purchased through retail channels. What would be illegal would be to make copies of our software and sell it using the cracked technology or to ship our drivers, unlicensed, to the field. In the life a given hardware product, independent software developers will make many upgrades and not all of them will be free. We make money on hardware once, and that piece of hardware is an "enabler" for many other companies over the course of its lifetime.
I believe that there will be a mechanism for independent developers to use the latest technology colorimeter, purchased through retail channels, but I need to confirm that. Understand that the latest technology products are significantly different than the earlier products and do require a certain amount of training to implement properly. It's not in anyone's best interest to open the technology to everyone who thinks they are a developer until we understand the support and training costs. Not everyone is a Karl or Graeme. Is it in the consumers best interests to have poor software implementations of new hardware technology? Should we make exceptions for certain developers who may have the knowledge and not allow other developers into the fray? How do we make sure that an iSV product doesn't kill a retail product by overlaying different dll's or packages? How do we cover release of information that is currently under application for patent? How do we inform ISV's of changes that are warranted by changes in operating systems. How do we justify the costs of system support to the ISV community given that we make money only on the sale of the hardware item? There is nothing nefarious here, it just takes time and resources which are not available at the moment.
Third hand comments about internal corporate policy (which, by the way is probably covered by NDA) such as those from Mr Wagner, should not generate the frenzy of nonsense that we have seen on this list. Snarky and uninformed comments like those of Mr. Segal add nothing to a solution to the issues of ISV support. I hope that you all have a better understanding of the situation and we can end this mindless thread started with third hand information taken out of the context of reality.....
Regards, Tom Lianza
On 8/19/11 6:25 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <info@pigment-print.com> wrote:
On 08/19/2011 09:57 AM, Karl Koch wrote:
*snip*
If the communication interface for the Dreamcolor versions could be cracked I suppose that ccmxmake could adapt the filtering sufficiently for other monitor types. There may even be some experience on adaption with the NEC variety.
<irony> I´m not quite sure, cracking software or communication interfaces is quite legal</irony> Looks like that´s what had happened in ccmxmake, bt it can well be that Argyll has permission to do so.
Let me rephrase that to: "an alternative driver created for".
*snip*
The current policy is bad for consumers and is anticompetitive.
I don´t think so! On the contrary: This policy (with which I don´t agree either, but it´s X-Rite´s decision and none of my business) will encourage competitors to develop, manufacture and sell new instruments without these restrictions. And thus we will have a competitive situation not only in the field of software, but also in hardware. This will break X-Rite´s monopoly – and they have begged for it ;-)
My thoughts too. Too much good CM software around that needs compatible hardware. What came to the surface in hard- and software so far from the GM + M + X merges is not convincing. Including more restrictions on its use + applying absurd new restrictions on the software it had to replace. What looked like a potential monopolist some years ago could be a niche player soon enough with this policy. A policy that Apple might exploit successfully but not X-rite.
A redesign of for example the SpectroCam could have a bright future, bundling it with a nice colorimeter for monitor calibration would overcome the US patent issue too. Add something like Argyll's ccmxmake and that bundle delivers more than the sum of two devices. Barbieri is still alive, the Spyder colorimeters improved a lot and with a Chinese CM software company running now it would be surprising if there would not appear some hardware from that part of the world too.
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/mgsegal%40rogers.com
This email sent to mgsegal@rogers.com
------------------------------
Message: 3 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:54:25 -0400 From: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support To: MARK SEGAL <mgsegal@rogers.com>, Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>, Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>, "Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Message-ID: <CA73F161.AA74%tlianza@xrite.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Just so there is no misunderstanding here: What got published was second or third hand information that was possibly released in violation of an NDA.
From this source, a perception developed that we, X-rite, were somehow trying to limit the product for our own uses, which was completely untrue. From this, we see a demand to contact your X-rite representative and raise a great flag of rebellion. I tried to intelligently point out to those who can read, that there are significant issues which take time and resources to finalize, that are not available at the moment. The new technology is not trivial to implement. We also have two separate implementation paths, one for OEM’s and another for Developers, both internal and external. The documentation for the second path was recently completed but to be frank, it is hard for me to follow and there is steep learning curve because of all the issues I posed earlier in the post. The policy that is mentioned at the release of the product is not necessarily a policy that covers the life of the product. X-rite’s “self-perceived immediate interests” are making sure that we don’t get swamped by developer issues that overwhelm the technical support team which will then lead to poor implementations in the field.
Now with my comment about “uninformed”: the filter issue you referred to was a GLASS filter not plastic filter issue and it was cured many months ago.
Regards, Tom
On 8/19/11 10:19 AM, "MARK SEGAL" <mgsegal@rogers.com> wrote:
"Reality" is perceived by different people in different ways depending on, amongst other things, at which end of the spectrum they happen to sit, what their interests are, and how these matters affect them personally. While some peoples' reality is other peoples' snark, we'll see over time which perspective prevails. And if there is really critical misinformation out here, maybe the company needs to do more to correct that. Over the years of corporate history, the demise of bigger fish than XRite started when they just couldn't truly and seriously see beyond themselves and their self-perceived immediate interests.
Mark
From: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> To: Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>; Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>; Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 9:55:03 AM Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
To all,
It's hard to respond to so many erroneous opinions at one time, but I will make some general comments.
1. OEM products. When an OEM purchases a product from us, it is their product. There may be manufacturing differences, there may be firmware differences. Most important, X-rite cannot make a change to the product without specific agreement with the OEM. We can, and often do, make changes in the retail line of products. OEMs make specific volume commitments and often invest a significant amount of R&D and supply chain cost to implement the product in their product line. They also service the product. Some display vendors put the calibration software in the display. They have every right to insist on absolute customization. When I designed the Sony Artisan hardware I had to use a completely different strategy for suppression of static because their standards exceeded the FCC and European standards of the time. We also had to re-engineer the cable so that the insulation could be physically consumed. This required a change in the production techniques of the cable and very specific testing for impurities. OEM's invest heavily in their products and they need to protect that investment. They are not screwing the consumer. Comments like that indicate a total ignorance of the position that OEM's are in.
2. The small developer- Independent developers are an important part of our business. The question is: who supports the hardware product? A developer like Graeme Gill "cracks" our products at "arm's length". In the US, this is completely legal and has been defended in court many times (the DOS BIOS is a good example of how this worked). He applies his technology to a product that was legally purchased through retail channels. What would be illegal would be to make copies of our software and sell it using the cracked technology or to ship our drivers, unlicensed, to the field. In the life a given hardware product, independent software developers will make many upgrades and not all of them will be free. We make money on hardware once, and that piece of hardware is an "enabler" for many other companies over the course of its lifetime.
I believe that there will be a mechanism for independent developers to use the latest technology colorimeter, purchased through retail channels, but I need to confirm that. Understand that the latest technology products are significantly different than the earlier products and do require a certain amount of training to implement properly. It's not in anyone's best interest to open the technology to everyone who thinks they are a developer until we understand the support and training costs. Not everyone is a Karl or Graeme. Is it in the consumers best interests to have poor software implementations of new hardware technology? Should we make exceptions for certain developers who may have the knowledge and not allow other developers into the fray? How do we make sure that an iSV product doesn't kill a retail product by overlaying different dll's or packages? How do we cover release of information that is currently under application for patent? How do we inform ISV's of changes that are warranted by changes in operating systems. How do we justify the costs of system support to the ISV community given that we make money only on the sale of the hardware item? There is nothing nefarious here, it just takes time and resources which are not available at the moment.
Third hand comments about internal corporate policy (which, by the way is probably covered by NDA) such as those from Mr Wagner, should not generate the frenzy of nonsense that we have seen on this list. Snarky and uninformed comments like those of Mr. Segal add nothing to a solution to the issues of ISV support. I hope that you all have a better understanding of the situation and we can end this mindless thread started with third hand information taken out of the context of reality.....
Regards, Tom Lianza
On 8/19/11 6:25 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <info@pigment-print.com> wrote:
On 08/19/2011 09:57 AM, Karl Koch wrote:
*snip*
>> If the communication interface for the Dreamcolor versions could be
cracked
>> I >> suppose that ccmxmake could adapt the filtering sufficiently for other >> monitor >> types. There may even be some experience on adaption with the NEC variety.
<irony> I´m not quite sure, cracking software or communication interfaces is quite legal</irony> Looks like that´s what had happened in ccmxmake, bt it can well be that Argyll has permission to do so.
Let me rephrase that to: "an alternative driver created for".
*snip*
>> The current policy is bad for consumers and is anticompetitive.
I don´t think so! On the contrary: This policy (with which I don´t agree either, but it´s X-Rite´s decision and none of my business) will encourage competitors to develop, manufacture and sell new instruments without these restrictions. And thus we will have a competitive situation not only in the field of software, but also in hardware. This will break X-Rite´s monopoly – and they have begged for it ;-)
My thoughts too. Too much good CM software around that needs compatible hardware. What came to the surface in hard- and software so far from the GM + M + X merges is not convincing. Including more restrictions on its use + applying absurd new restrictions on the software it had to replace. What looked like a potential monopolist some years ago could be a niche player soon enough with this policy. A policy that Apple might exploit successfully but not X-rite.
A redesign of for example the SpectroCam could have a bright future, bundling it with a nice colorimeter for monitor calibration would overcome the US patent issue too. Add something like Argyll's ccmxmake and that bundle delivers more than the sum of two devices. Barbieri is still alive, the Spyder colorimeters improved a lot and with a Chinese CM software company running now it would be surprising if there would not appear some hardware from that part of the world too.
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/mgsegal%40rogers.com
This email sent to mgsegal@rogers.com
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments.
------------------------------
Message: 4 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:01:57 -0700 (PDT) From: MARK SEGAL <mgsegal@rogers.com> Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support To: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com>, Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>, Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>, "Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Message-ID: <1313766117.36223.YahooMailNeo@web88618.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Fine Tom, let there be peace, and we will see over time how it all shakes out - BTW, I did not make the comment about plastic filters, though I am aware it was an issue.
Meanwhile a malicious hack was made a few minutes ago to remove me from this List, evidence of which was a notice I received asking to confirm MY request to be delisted. I have no idea who generated that nonsense, so I have asked Apple to investigate it and I have confirmed that I had no intention of removing myself from the List. I mention this here so that readers know there are some out there who just can't play by the rules and confine their behaviour to discussion, whether the ideas discussed are in their minds correct or not so correct.
 Mark
________________________________ From: Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> To: MARK SEGAL <mgsegal@rogers.com>; Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>; Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>; "Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com" <Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:54:25 AM Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support Just so there is no misunderstanding here:  What got published was second or third hand information that was possibly released in violation of an NDA.  From this source, a perception developed that we, X-rite, were  somehow trying to limit the product for our own uses, which was completely untrue.  From this, we see a demand to contact your X-rite representative and raise a great flag of rebellion.   I tried to intelligently point out to those who can read, that there are significant issues which take time and resources  to finalize, that are not available at the moment.  The new technology is not trivial to implement.  We also have two separate implementation paths, one for OEMâ•˙s and another for Developers, both internal and external.  The documentation for the second path was recently completed but to be frank, it is hard for me to follow and there is steep learning curve because of all the issues I posed earlier in the post.  The policy that is mentioned at the release of the product is not necessarily a policy that covers the life of the product.  X-riteâ•˙s ╲self-perceived immediate interests╡ are making sure that we donâ•˙t get swamped by developer issues that overwhelm the technical support team which will then lead to poor implementations in the field. Â
Now with my comment about ╲uninformed╡:  the filter issue you referred to was a GLASS filter not plastic filter issue and it was cured many months ago. Â
Regards, Tom
On 8/19/11 10:19 AM, "MARK SEGAL" <mgsegal@rogers.com> wrote:
"Reality" is perceived by different people in different ways depending on, amongst other things, at which end of the spectrum they happen to sit, what their interests are, and how these matters affect them personally. While some peoples' reality is other peoples' snark, we'll see over time which perspective prevails. And if there is really critical misinformation out here, maybe the company needs to do more to correct that. Over the years of corporate history, the demise of bigger fish than XRite started when they just couldn't truly and seriously see beyond themselves and their self-perceived immediate interests.
 Mark
________________________________ From:Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> To: Ernst Dinkla <info@pigment-print.com>; Karl Koch <kk@basICColor.de>; Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 9:55:03 AM Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
To all,
It's hard to respond to so many erroneous opinions at one time, but I will make some general comments.
1. OEM products. Â When an OEM purchases a product from us, it is their product. Â There may be manufacturing differences, there may be firmware differences. Â Most important, X-rite cannot make a change to the product without specific agreement with the OEM. Â We can, and often do, make changes in the retail line of products. Â OEMs make specific volume commitments and often invest a significant amount of R&D and supply chain cost to implement the product in their product line. Â They also service the product. Â Some display vendors put the calibration software in the display. Â They have every right to insist on absolute customization. When I designed the Sony Artisan hardware I had to use a completely different strategy for suppression of static because their standards exceeded the FCC and European standards of the time. Â We also had to re-engineer the cable so that the insulation could be physically consumed. Â This required a change in the production techniques of the cable and very specific testing for impurities. OEM's invest heavily in their products and they need to protect that investment. Â They are not screwing the consumer. Â Comments like that indicate a total ignorance of the position that OEM's are in.
2. The small developer- Independent developers are an important part of our business. Â The question is: who supports the hardware product? A developer like Graeme Gill "cracks" our products at "arm's length". Â In the US, this is completely legal and has been defended in court many times (the DOS BIOS is a good example of how this worked). Â He applies his technology to a product that was legally purchased through retail channels. Â What would be illegal would be to make copies of our software and sell it using the cracked technology or to ship our drivers, unlicensed, to the field. In the life a given hardware product, independent software developers will make many upgrades and not all of them will be free. Â We make money on hardware once, and that piece of hardware is an "enabler" for many other companies over the course of its lifetime.
I believe that there  will be a mechanism for independent developers to use the latest technology colorimeter, purchased through retail channels, but I need to confirm that.  Understand that the latest technology products are significantly different than the earlier products and do require a certain amount of training to implement properly. It's not in anyone's best interest to open the technology to everyone who thinks they are a developer until we understand the support and training costs.  Not everyone is a Karl or Graeme.  Is it in the consumers best interests to have poor software implementations of new hardware technology?  Should we make exceptions for certain developers who may have the knowledge and not allow other developers into the fray?  How do we make sure that an iSV product doesn't kill a retail product by overlaying different dll's or packages?   How do we cover release of information that is currently under application for patent?  How do we inform ISV's of changes that are warranted by changes in operating systems.  How do we justify the costs of system support to the ISV community given that we make money only on the sale of the hardware item? There is nothing nefarious here, it just takes time and resources which are not available at the moment.
Third hand comments about internal corporate policy (which, by the way is probably covered by NDA) Â such as those from Mr Wagner, should not generate the frenzy of nonsense that we have seen on this list. Â Snarky and uninformed comments like those of Mr. Segal add nothing to a solution to the issues of ISV support. I hope that you all have a better understanding of the situation and we can end this mindless thread started with third hand information taken out of the context of reality.....
 Regards, Tom Lianza
 Â
On 8/19/11 6:25 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <info@pigment-print.com> wrote:
On 08/19/2011 09:57 AM, Karl Koch wrote:
*snip*
 If the communication interface for the Dreamcolor versions could be cracked I  suppose that ccmxmake could adapt the filtering sufficiently for other monitor  types. There may even be some experience on adaption with the NEC variety.
<irony>  I´m not quite sure, cracking software or communication interfaces is quite legal</irony> Looks like that´s what had happened in ccmxmake, bt it can well be that Argyll has permission to do so.
Let me rephrase that to: "an alternative driver created for".
*snip*
 The current policy is bad for consumers and is anticompetitive.
I don´t think so! On the contrary: This policy (with which I don´t agree either, but it´s X-Rite´s decision and none of my business) will encourage competitors to develop, manufacture and sell new instruments without these restrictions. And thus we will have a competitive situation not only in the field of software, but also in hardware. This will break X-Rite´s monopoly ╄ and they have begged for it ;-)
My thoughts too. Too much good CM software around that needs compatible hardware. What  came to the surface in hard- and software so far from the GM + M + X merges is not convincing. Including more restrictions on its use + applying absurd new restrictions on the software it had to replace. What looked like a potential monopolist some years ago could be a niche player soon enough with this policy. A policy that Apple might exploit successfully but not X-rite.
A redesign of for example the SpectroCam could have a bright future, bundling it with a nice colorimeter for monitor calibration would overcome the US patent issue too. Add something like Argyll's ccmxmake and that bundle delivers more than the sum of two devices. Barbieri is still alive, the Spyder colorimeters improved a lot and with a Chinese CM software company running now it would be surprising if there would not appear some hardware from that part of the world too.
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments.  _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list      (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/mgsegal%40rogers.com
This email sent to mgsegal@rogers.com
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email or any attachments.   –– Â
------------------------------
Message: 5 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:32:27 +0200 From: Jan-Peter Homann <homann@colormanagement.de> Subject: Re: Colorimeters and third-party developer support To: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com, Tom Lianza <tlianza@xrite.com> Message-ID: <4E4E820B.1070900@colormanagement.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hello Tom, Thanks for replying fast and detailed to the list. I´m currently talking with different developers and I have the impression, that X-Rite made a big change in the licensing policy from i1 Pro to i1 Display Pro.
Some developers I have talked with, stated that I should not publish details about our talks. But the current impression I have, is that much less developers will support the i1 Display Pro compared to the i1 Pro.
And this is not only about small developers.
I asked an representative from an important japanese display vendorabout support for i1 Display Pro in their own display calibration solution.
He stated, that he can currently can´t state if and when they will support the i1 Display Pro and that I know the discussion at the colorsync mailinglist....
Regards Jan-Peter Homann
-- ---------- Please note the new adress --------------
homann colormanagement --------- fon +49 30 611 075 18 Jan-Peter Homann ------------ mobile +49 171 54 70 358 Cotheniusstr. 3 -------- http://www.colormanagement.de 10407 Berlin -------- mailto:homann@colormanagement.de
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Colorsync-users mailing list Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
End of Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 8, Issue 186 ***********************************************