[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: millennium liquid laminate




Yes, I know we went through this before and my mind still has't changed. I just
happen to agree with Jim. And no, it as nothing to do with Wilhelm. *MY* issue
is that it is only one source that everbody puts faith in. And no, I haven't
picked up any books. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. It's still only one source, as good
as that one source may be. It's still one source.

Secondly, I've stated consistantly and repeatedly that my issue is NOT with
Wilhelm, his integrity, his knowledge, or his credibility. i.e., never have I
ever suggested any "treachery" in any post. That's why I repeat myself. Because
I don't want anybody thinking the issue is about him. For others in may be, for
me it is not. For me, it's the clout the industry gives one man. In my opinion,
that's a dangerous situation REGARDLESS of who that man is. Up to and including
me. I think I'm an honest and honorable man. But given that can of power, I'd
like to think that I'd remain that kind of man. But I can't know for sure
because I've never had that kind of power. I do know that it would be tempting
to abuse.

Thirdly, you have what seems to be like an undying faith in science. That's
fine for you. I on the other respect scientific achievements, but do not have
the same level of faith in scientific exactness that you have (particularily in
predictive applications). That's my right and my opinion. Opinions that I
believe I can back up with science. But in the end, they are merely one man's
opinion, mine. 

Lastly, it is clear to me that we are destined not to agree on much. That fine.
But I feel my positions are always clearly stated. NEVER have I indicated any
malice on Henry's part as you alledge in your post. The upsets and angers me
that you paint a picture of a guy playing both sides of the fence. Whether it's
Henry Wilhelm or John Smith or me, the issue for me is still the same. One
source. 

As far as my analysis concerning Apple, it is in my oipinion extremely
accurate. You've worked at a fortune 10 company. Well, I've worked in two,
General Motors and now Ford Motor. I am now an account manager for information
technology (moved from engineering to IT about 4 years ago). My job is to
control budget and to direct technology solutions. About 10 years ago, there
was a company called Fortune Systems that went belly up and left Ford with no
support or direction. Ford Motor made a decision then that they would never
source to a supplier that locked them into a particular product line. It is a
policy that I've seen mimicked by many large corporations. They simply don't
want to be left holding the bag should something happen to the vendor. So while
I am not disputing what you claim at one corporation, what I'm telling you is
that by and large corporations don't like that type of solution. Many times we
make decisions to do business with company A over company B because company A
is large and in our opinion, more stable. i.e. less risky. It's a fact.

--- "Richard N. Moyer" <dickmoyer@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Mike -
> We went through this once before (at least) on this list.
> 
> Have you bent the book yet? Meaning read up on it? The issue of 
> reading up on the subject came up last time.
> 
> You seem to have two sides on this. For a given period of time its 
> the Wilhlem treachery, woo unto the poor hapless 
> customer/user/whatever opposite the great power of Wilhelm.
> 
> The next period, it is I didn't mean what I said about Wilhelm. He's 
> a nice guy, probably credible, yes, I believe in the science, - - 
> (maybe not predictability, heavens, how does he know - soothsayer 
> that he is, maybe charlatan also. Say, is he a Doctor?)
> 
> Are we back to period one again?
> 
> Oh, the anecdote about Apple and Corporate America. So happens I 
> worked in Corporate America - Fortune 10 company. At the time, this 
> company was nearly all Apple (and it wasn't that long ago). There 
> NEVER was an issue of second sourcing, or rejection because of a lack 
> of alternate sourcing. As to the present state, Apple does not wish 
> to play in the Corporate market. Reason: collateral expense - called 
> contractual service and support, and Job's conviction that the world 
> doesn't need another Dell. Uou've brought up that argument before. 
> It's dead wrong. Been there.
> 
> >--- "J. Arthur Davis" <jarthurdavis@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>  You can not have only one or two companies dictating their results to
> >>  the whole industry without anyone being able to verify their results. It
> >>  is absolutely insane, but we all seem willing to accept it.
> >
> >Boy do I ever agree with that! In a post I authored back in the spring, I
> was
> >trying to say exactly the same thing.To reiterate, I don't know Henry
> Wilhelm.
> >I assume that he is a credible guy with a ton of knowledge in this area. I
> >assume he is a honorable guy. So I'm not puttin him on trial AT ALL.
> However,
> >it seems as though his blessing or cursing on an ink/paper combination is
> all
> >that's necessary to make or break a product. This is extremely dangerous and
> >leaves everbody exposed.
> >
> >I know there are a ton of Mac users on this list. But do you know why Apple
> >hasn't been able to make significant headway in corporate America? It has
> >absolutely nothing to do with the Mac's abilities. It has everything 
> >to do with
> >choices. For years, Apple and their proponents have stressed how much could
> be
> >saved by networking Macs vs. PCs. How much lower the support 
> >overhead would be,
> >etc. BUT, you had to buy product manufactured by Apple. You couldn't 
> >go out and
> >get competitive bids on compatible hardware. As a company you were commited
> to
> >Apple. For large corporations, this doesn't sit well. In our case, 
> >we're like a
> >bunch of drones marching to the beat of what Henry says. Once again, HE MAY
> BE
> >RIGHT. But something tells me that different labs with a different
> >philosophy/methodology would come up with different results. You are then
> left
> >with credentials. The guy with the most of them wins. But is he right? I
> don't
> >know. Do you?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >=====
> >Visit my digital photography web site along with a lot of other 
> >interesting stuff at http://greer.simplenet.com. Also, Greer and 
> >Associates (http://www.greeraa.com) offers studio photography, 
> >digital imaging services, web site design/construction, and training.
> >
> >Mike Greer
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> >http://im.yahoo.com
> >-
> >Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
> >accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
> 
> -
> Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
> accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
> 

=====
Visit my digital photography web site along with a lot of other interesting stuff at http://greer.simplenet.com. Also, Greer and Associates (http://www.greeraa.com) offers studio photography, digital imaging services, web site design/construction, and training. 

Mike Greer
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
-
Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.


[Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Scanner]     [Gimp]     [Gimp] Users

Powered by Linux