Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/02/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Erwin Puts' M7 report
From: Adam Bridge <abridge@idea-processing.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 15:37:25 -0800

On 2/24/02 at 4:36 PM, bdcolen@earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) thoughtfully wrote:

> 2. IF the M7 coating was changed to reduce reflection, then Leica has
> finally tacitly acknowledged that the M6 was/is DEFECTIVE. So the question
> then is - aren't we all entitled to have the M7 fix applied to our M6s at no
> charge?

Gee - if an automobile manufacturer puts on anti-lock breaks which work better
does that make previous car defective?

I don't think so.

Geesh - with your point of view there would be no incentive for any manufactuer
to improve a product since it will always be "defective" in some way and require
a new one to replace.

Sheesh - give me a break.

Adam
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Feliciano di Giorgio <feli@d2.com> (Re: [Leica] Erwin Puts' M7 report)