Re: Getting around the firewire problem was Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!

["Moreno Polloni" <mp@dccnet.com>]

> > I'm quite amused at your assertions at who my
> > customers are.
>
> All you've described thus far is desktop users, and desktop systems are
not
> production systems in any mission-critical sense.  The company will not
fail
> because a desktop computer isn't working.
>
> > Most of them are indeed in a production environment,
> > most of them upgrade often and run current technology.

A large part of my business deals with 3D animation, video editing, and
pre-press graphics. You may call these desktop systems, I call these
production systems.

> See above.

Please do.

> > I personally don't know of anyone, other than you,
> > that takes two months to upgrade their system.
>
> Spend a couple of decades working with real production systems, and you'll
know
> lots of people like that.  In fact, you'll know people who take a year to
> upgrade a system.  I've certainly had to deal with people like this quite
often,
> and in fact I've been one myself, when I was working on that side of the
fence.

In the context of this scanner newsgroup, I doubt you'll find that anyone
takes a year to upgrade their systems, especially if their livelihood
depends on it. And when their livelihood depends on reliable systems, they
probably won't be saddling them more than 100 applications, as you yourself
have done. But they will upgrade often to take advantage of newer, faster
hardware and software upgrades.

> You make the same mistake that many microcomputer companies make,
including the
> big ones like Microsoft.  Their employees have never dealt with true
> mission-critical systems, in the mainframe or NASA sense (for example),
and are
> so completely ignorant of these domains that they refuse to acknowledge
their
> existence.

Your are right in that I haven't dealt with NASA and have very little to do
with mainframes. Perhaps you can discuss those systems on a more appropriate
newsgroup.