Digital BW, The Print

Nij-

I think we're agreeing <g>

tom


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Nij" <nigel@m...> wrote:
> Tom,
> 
> But don't forget what an open system can achieve - new job-roles and
> specialists charging $$$ who are the only ones who have the time to 
look
> into the black-box and understand what all the buttons on the 
outside do. Of
> course, I am thinking about colour management... and yes, I do 
suspect that
> ICC/ICM is probably better than 'what was there before' 
(nothing???) but it
> also STILL leaves some users wasting time and prints to get colour 
right
> (even when they have made substantial efforts to calibrate their 
system!)
> 
> Piezo is still strong in it's simplicity - even if it is less than 
flexible
> in allowing 'full-control' of editing ICQ profiles and so forth. 
The choice
> to use third-party inks is still reasonably accesible by buying a 
cartridge
> starter kit if you want ;)
> 
> Just trying to play a little devil's advocate here - I have no 
particular
> knowledge on Cone's thought process here, and have no particular 
preference
> myself as to splitting ink from software, or not. I _will_ tell you 
though
> that if anyone called me up with a problem printing 'other' inks 
through the
> Piezo driver... and the problems were 'tonality' related, I would be
> pretty-much forced to say "Sounds like an ink problem". I'm not 
saying that
> support would cease - but I am saying that a certain area of 
support would
> effectively become 'off-limits'. I imagine you would have similar 
issues
> calling Epson saying you were having problems with ICM profiles 
through
> their driver - they WOULD blame something  / someone else ;)
> 
> I believe Piezo2 will give end users more flexibility (and 
therefore perhaps
> more openness) - but also perhaps more complexity.
> 
> Just some thoughts...
> 
> Nij  [Looking forward to charging ?1000 per day as a 'grey 
management
> consultant' <grins>)
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tomoc [mailto:tomoc@y...]
> > Sent: 05 January 2002 02:16
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] inks
> >
> >
> > Julian-
> >
> > I wasn't taking a shot at you. Actually, I agree with you 
completely.
> > This is a very valid criticism of Cone. 2 years ago, there might 
have
> > been some validity to him wanting to keep his system "pure" since 
it
> > was undergoing so much development and the alternatives were very
> > much unproven. To maintain this position today is closing his 
eyes to
> > reality. To try to "manage the market" has been a big mistake for 
any
> > company that tried. In a field this large, a closed architecture
> > attitude will eventually cause the company great harm. Look at the
> > success of the Palm Pilot against the mighty Microsoft; I believe
> > that the biggest factor here was the developer community was 
courted
> > by Palm... And Cone may be making the same mistake by not courting
> > the likes of Paul and John who are delivering some pretty 
incredible
> > tools to us (not to mention they are giving away the help and the
> > inks they write for are half the price of Cone ink...though this 
is
> > not about price).
> >
> > Anyhow, you make a good point on forcing customers to buy the ink
> > with the software. I believe that should be the customer choice 
and
> > that most people should and would at least try the Cone ink, so 
what
> > would be lost by the good will of allowing customer choice?
> >
> > Tom O'Connell
> >