Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Your original statement --quoted below-- says that Tom A. was only able to make a cheaper and better RW because of Leica's initial R&D. I think that is not true and I think you also believe that now if I am reading you next statement correctly. John Collier On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 02:01 PM, Kit McChesney | acmefoto wrote: > I did not say "remanufactured Leicavit." I said "redesigned product." > There > is quite a difference between those two concepts. Let it be known that > I did > not say that Tom's winder was a knockoff of the Leicavit. It is a > product > redesigned on the model of the original Leicavit to perform the > function of > the discontinued original Leicavit, a design that eventually improved > upon > and outshone the original Leicavit. >> Earlier you said: >> >> With MORE all due respect to everyone, including Tom, there is one >> factor >> that we haven't actually factored into this equation: Tom's products >> would >> not exist in their current configuration (if at all) had Leica not >> invested >> in R&D in the original Leicavit product when it was first introduced. >> That >> fact may or may not be relevant now, but it is true that it would be >> much >> easier for one to take apart an existing product and remanufacture or >> improve upon the original design, than to make a totally new design, >> completely from scratch. There is engineering and design time and >> investment >> in the original product that is absent from the manufacture of the >> redesigned product made by an after-market concern... - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html