Re: [Leica] Leicavit/Tom's Winder/Aftermarket, etc.

[John Collier <jbcollier@shaw.ca>]

Boy that is a lot of words Kit. I do not see much substance though; 
speculation, oh yes, in spades. Have you ever had either winder apart? 
This is why what you are saying sounds so ridiculous to those of us who 
have. By the way, have you seen the movie "The Princess Bride"? While I 
am admittedly a bit of a simpleton, I am also not sure you know what 
"inconceivable" means.

John Collier

On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 05:54 PM, Kit McChesney | acmefoto wrote:

> John--
>
> What you are quoting proves my point, which is this:
>
> The Rapidwinder, Tom's product, would never have existed had his own
> Leicavit winders not failed to function, and Leica had not stopped 
> producing
> them, and by logical (if not practical) extension, had Leica not made 
> the
> Leicavit winder in the first place. Tom says as much about the winder
> himself, on his own Web site, that he decided to make a new winder 
> because
> his old ones no longer worked, were impossible to repair, did not fit 
> his
> M4-Ps and M6's, and since Leica no longer made them, whatever remained 
> on
> the market had become "prized collectibles." This is what I meant, and 
> what
> I said, in the post you are quoting, not exactly out of context, but 
> with
> your own "spin" on it.
>
> It is inconceivable that Tom did not take elements and ideas from the
> original in creating his own invention vis-a-vis the original's 
> design, even
> if only to build upon and improve on what wasn't working or what had 
> failed
> in order to improve upon upon it. And yes, I do believe that Tom 
> probably
> benefited from Leica's original design (and therefore their investment 
> in
> the original product) in creating his own. I used the example of an MP
> "knockoff" to illustrate the point.
>
> Production always goes faster when you have a template. And even if Tom
> substantially changed the template upon which he based his winder, 
> which we
> know he did in large part, I'm sure he gleaned a great deal of design 
> and
> engineering information in the process by doing so. That process is
> valuable. For anyone who has ever designed anything, you must know that
> design is an iterative process. One after another after another after
> another, and you refine as you go. Only a simpleton would argue that 
> Tom's
> design was created in a vacuum, was not influenced by anyone else's 
> work, or
> did not represent an iteration, albeit an improved one, upon the 
> original.
>
> I only brought this up in the context of the original topic of 
> discussion,
> which was not how Tom designed the winder, but why the differences in 
> cost
> between the two products. I'm fully aware that Leica's costs are 
> higher.
> That's a no-brainer. Of course it costs more to run a corporation 
> rather
> than a small shop. And bottom-line, short answer, simple answer, that's
> probably why they cost more. But there is more "why" to the "why" than 
> just
> "Leica's bigger" and "Tom's smaller." There are more costs involved in 
> the
> operation of a company that has hundreds of interchangeable products 
> in its
> line, and all the R&D and production costs associated with that, that 
> are
> all built-in to the price of the Leicavit, than there are in the R&D 
> and
> production costs for one winder product made by a small concern in a 
> corner
> of a totally different country. In that regard, my remark is taken
> "somewhat" out of context.
>
> I am not trying to put down or diminish the value of Tom's products. 
> If you
> would kindly read what I have written in its entirety, instead of 
> pulling
> out parts to buttress your own preconceived idea about why I wrote 
> what I
> did, you would probably understand the intent of my remarks. They were
> posted in large part to counter what I thought were others' overly
> simplistic view of what it takes to design a product and bring to 
> market. If
> you don't agree with my view, you can certainly disagree. But don't 
> try to
> slice and dice what I've said in order to attempt to make it look as 
> though
> I said something I did not say.

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