[Leica] POOR DR. Blacktape: was re: Leica camera rumours

[Aaron Ruby <aruby@rci.rutgers.edu>]

"B. D. Colen" wrote:

> DR. BLACKTAPE WOULD ONLY ADD THAT ...The below is certainly true, but
> consider one thing - if Apple dies tomorrow, the computers, which are by
> definition obsolete as they are manufactured, fall more and more behind the
> curve, the owner-base shrinks, little or no new software, etc. etc.....If
> Leica dies tomorrow, our M6s, 4s, etc., will be the same efficient
> mechanical rangefinders when our children are using them as they are now,
> and the lenses will be just as sharp...which means there's less reason for
> us to fixate on the future of a publicly held German company than there is
> for the Apple corps to fixate on the future of Apple....

POOR POOR Dr. Blacktape. Pretending to see distinctions where none lie and
committing the fallacy of the double standard. Let's suppose both Apple and
Leica died tomorrow. According to the doctor, the following would happen to
the Apple-using population: owner base shrinks over time (machines eventually
fail, people abandon them, etc.) and the addition of new features (by means of
new software or hardware upgrades) is no longer an available option (barring
third party intervention, which presumably would progressively diminish due to
shrinking owner base). How is this any less true with the Leica-using
population. Owner base still shrinks over time and the availability of new
features (lenses, flash, metering, digital options, etc.) shrinks with it.

According to the Dr., if Leica disappeared tomorrow the following would
happen: existing cameras would still work just as well and be capable of
carrying out their function just as efficiently as ever (producing sharp
images when properly focused, etc.). How would the situation be any different
for the Apple products? Would they not continue to perform just as
efficiently, accomplishing their tasks with the same speed and accuracy as
ever?

If anything, based on the considerations the Dr. adverts to, the Apple-using
population is in better stead in the sense that Apple computer feature sets
are far more fluid than those of the Leica M camera and the it's much less
resource intensive for an end user or third party to add her own features to
the set for a computer (e.g., by writing her own software) than it is with the
Leicas (which would require expensive machining tools, etc.).

On the other hand, the advantage for the Leica-using population is that their
machines are likely to survive, on average, much longer than a computer. Thus
the rate of shrinkage in the owner base over time would be far less.

Fortunately for the doctor, he stated a true conclusion--were both companies
to go under, the Leica-using population probably has less to worry about from
the stance of replacing their machines when they fail (the user is likely to
fail first) than Macntosh users. BUT, from the stance of being able to modify
the feature sets of their machines, the Mac user is way out in front. In any
event, the doctor's conclusion IN NO WAY FOLLOWS from his premises, since both
sets of premises apply to both user populations. The doctor's conclusion ONLY
FOLLOWS if one specifies that one is solely concerned with the effects of the
irreplacability of their machines once they fail and if one adds the premise
that Leicas last longer than Macs.

Better luck next time, Doctor.

Best,

Aaron

P.S. OKAY, OKAY, I had a little too much spare time on my hands. What can I
say, I can't read Japanese and I was a little bored.