Nikon recall pre release ...

[Eldar]

Just found this

http://www.diyphotography.net/nikon-issues-pre-emptive-recalls-d5-d500-please-return-service-advance/#more-42907

 

[GuyF]

"...While our engineers have found no flaws in either design or manufacturing of the newest products we are certain that our customers will spend every waking minute of every day until they find some sort of minor flaw as regards our latest cameras. We fully intend to actually test and use these new cameras ourselves before unleashing them on the public...."

So does that suggest the public are normally looked upon by Nikon as unsuspecting beta testers?

 

[J.R.]

Just found this

http://www.diyphotography.net/nikon-issues-pre-emptive-recalls-d5-d500-please-return-service-advance/#more-42907

Really Eldar ... ;D ;D

On a serious note though, I do hope for my Nikon shooting friends who have ordered the D5/D500 that their cameras turn out fine. The way Nikon handled the D600 fiasco was beyond belief.

 

[rfdesigner]

"...While our engineers have found no flaws in either design or manufacturing of the newest products we are certain that our customers will spend every waking minute of every day until they find some sort of minor flaw as regards our latest cameras. We fully intend to actually test and use these new cameras ourselves before unleashing them on the public...."

So does that suggest the public are normally looked upon by Nikon as unsuspecting beta testers?

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

It's cheaper than testing.

 

[J.R.]

"...While our engineers have found no flaws in either design or manufacturing of the newest products we are certain that our customers will spend every waking minute of every day until they find some sort of minor flaw as regards our latest cameras. We fully intend to actually test and use these new cameras ourselves before unleashing them on the public...."

So does that suggest the public are normally looked upon by Nikon as unsuspecting beta testers?

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

It's cheaper than testing.

While the actual beta testers will iron our some of the kinks, they won't be able to identify all of the potential problems in a product. The first adopters of any product do act as beta testers without their knowing it. If the same problem surfaces sufficient number of times, a firmware update or a product recall will be done.

 

[rfdesigner]

"...While our engineers have found no flaws in either design or manufacturing of the newest products we are certain that our customers will spend every waking minute of every day until they find some sort of minor flaw as regards our latest cameras. We fully intend to actually test and use these new cameras ourselves before unleashing them on the public...."

So does that suggest the public are normally looked upon by Nikon as unsuspecting beta testers?

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

It's cheaper than testing.

While the actual beta testers will iron our some of the kinks, they won't be able to identify all of the potential problems in a product. The first adopters of any product do act as beta testers without their knowing it. If the same problem surfaces sufficient number of times, a firmware update or a product recall will be done.

I know the principle.. the point is some companies (i.e. Canon) seem to get away with very few recalls/patches, whilst others (M$) have a never ending stream of fixes (I don't seem to get anything like that for Ubuntu).

Point is canon products, on the whole, "just" work. (I know sometimes there's a problem, but IME across their product range problems are relatively rare (50f1.4 being a possible exception), which on the whole suggests reasonably thorough testing and high level product decisions that usually favour reliability over functionality, which is probably why their stuff costs a more, the 35LII being a prime example ;D

Test is the Cinderella or engineering.. and sorts the men from the boys.

anyway, funny link by the OP.. Nikon stuff isn't that bad.

 

[GuyF]

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

Yeah, you're right but if I were an engineer for Nikon (or anyone), I'd insist I test "my" product to destruction before signing it off. I know companies will have a finite budget for testing etc. but surely the engineers must have some professional pride in what they've created and will make some noise if they feel their managers are releasing substandard goods.

Alas bean counters rule the world....

 

[J.R.]

the point is some companies (i.e. Canon) seem to get away with very few recalls/patches, whilst others (M$) have a never ending stream of fixes (I don't seem to get anything like that for Ubuntu).

Point is canon products, on the whole, "just" work. (I know sometimes there's a problem, but IME across their product range problems are relatively rare (50f1.4 being a possible exception), which on the whole suggests reasonably thorough testing and high level product decisions that usually favour reliability over functionality, which is probably why their stuff costs a more, the 35LII being a prime example ;D

Oh please ... Nikon innovates and adds stuff to each generation of a camera. There are so many innovations in each generation that the beta testers can't test it all and that's why Nikon users face problems. You see?

Canon on the other hand doesn't innovate and is doomed till it catches up with Nikon / Sony. It uses outdated technology and keeps recycling old products. Products based on old technology don't need any extensive testing and that is the only reason that Canon products simply work. I'm not sure whether it should be allowed. And don't you get me started on DR, don't you know what DxO said? :-X :-X :-X

#sarcasm

 

[Eldar]

Just found this

http://www.diyphotography.net/nikon-issues-pre-emptive-recalls-d5-d500-please-return-service-advance/#more-42907

Really Eldar ... ;D ;D

On a serious note though, I do hope for my Nikon shooting friends who have ordered the D5/D500 that their cameras turn out fine. The way Nikon handled the D600 fiasco was beyond belief.

He he, I thought it was a good joke

 

[Click]

Hilarious. ;D Thanks for posting, Eldar.

 

[rfdesigner]

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

Yeah, you're right but if I were an engineer for Nikon (or anyone), I'd insist I test "my" product to destruction before signing it off. I know companies will have a finite budget for testing etc. but surely the engineers must have some professional pride in what they've created and will make some noise if they feel their managers are releasing substandard goods.

Alas bean counters rule the world....

it isn't the engineers.. they generally want to sit on the products for another 6 months to iron out as many wrinkles as possible, it's the sales/finance guys who want to ship the prototype then blame everyone except themselves when it blows up in the customers face.

 

[Ozarker]

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

Yeah, you're right but if I were an engineer for Nikon (or anyone), I'd insist I test "my" product to destruction before signing it off. I know companies will have a finite budget for testing etc. but surely the engineers must have some professional pride in what they've created and will make some noise if they feel their managers are releasing substandard goods.

Alas bean counters rule the world....

it isn't the engineers.. they generally want to sit on the products for another 6 months to iron out as many wrinkles as possible, it's the sales/finance guys who want to ship the prototype then blame everyone except themselves when it blows up in the customers face.

I find that hard to believe that it is the sales guys or the finance guys fault. Releasing bad product hurts the sales and finance guys more than anybody. The sales force has little to nothing to do with product readiness for release. They just have to sell it when it is released. I'm sure that selling crap that isn't ready is very embarrassing to them. Face it, a salesman makes his money off of sales. He can't sell as much bad product as good product.

The finance guys? Same thing. It does not help them to have to pay out refunds, warranty work, repairs, loss of sales, lawsuits etc. Or help them to secure more financing for projects when the manufacturing side can't deliver.

I've worked on the manufacturing side most of my life. Sales didn't tell us crap about when a product was ready and when to release it. Never. WE told them.

Finance? They and sales want as much as anyone to see a product be a success. Nobody trusts a salesman when he provides the customer with bad product. For a salesman to survive he's got to consistently provide good product and that comes from design and manufacturing. He has ZERO say as to what a product looks like, when it will be released, etc. ZERO.

Does one think the local car dealership tells Toyota when a product is going to be released and what it should look like or how it should perform? No. They just have to sell the product. That is their only function.

Any company that lets the sales and marketing guys force manufacturing to release a product before it is ready does not deserve to survive. I just do not believe it happens that way. I see that expressed here a lot, but I don't believe it at all.

Nobody ships prototypes out to sell to customers. Prototypes aren't manufactured in large numbers. Never.

pro·to·type
ˈprōdəˌtīp/
noun
1. a first, typical or preliminary model of something, especially a machine, from which other forms are developed or copied.
"the firm is testing a prototype of the weapon"

If Nikon design and manufacturing screws the pooch enough... more customers will fall away from Nikon and the sales force will starve to death or move on.

If any company consistently provides bad products, the dealers will order less and less of their products.

 

[kaihp]

Nobody ships prototypes out to sell to customers. Prototypes aren't manufactured in large numbers. Never.

I agree with a lot of your points, even though I'm from the R&D corner rather than manufacturing.

However, I wonder what you define as 'large numbers'. I come from a regulated business (medical devices) and we've had thousands of prototypes manufactured for validation purposes.

Novo Nordisk produces in excess of 1 billion (1E9) prefilled insulin pens every year. When they do prototypes, they don't manufacture just one or two units

 

[Don Haines]

"...While our engineers have found no flaws in either design or manufacturing of the newest products we are certain that our customers will spend every waking minute of every day until they find some sort of minor flaw as regards our latest cameras. We fully intend to actually test and use these new cameras ourselves before unleashing them on the public...."

So does that suggest the public are normally looked upon by Nikon as unsuspecting beta testers?

I thought most big companies treat their customers like this.

It's cheaper than testing.

While the actual beta testers will iron our some of the kinks, they won't be able to identify all of the potential problems in a product. The first adopters of any product do act as beta testers without their knowing it. If the same problem surfaces sufficient number of times, a firmware update or a product recall will be done.

Yes, the 7D2 had a couple of early firmware updates for minor bugs......

 

[TeT]

I wonder how Nikon viewed that article... I am sure corporate Canon found it amusing.

I looked up the author of the article: seems that he uses whatever he picks up.. Hasselblad, Nikon, Sony, cannot find him and Canon anywhere..

 

[Ozarker]

Nobody ships prototypes out to sell to customers. Prototypes aren't manufactured in large numbers. Never.

I agree with a lot of your points, even though I'm from the R&D corner rather than manufacturing.

However, I wonder what you define as 'large numbers'. I come from a regulated business (medical devices) and we've had thousands of prototypes manufactured for validation purposes.

Novo Nordisk produces in excess of 1 billion (1E9) prefilled insulin pens every year. When they do prototypes, they don't manufacture just one or two units

But they don't make a billion prototypes either do they? Maybe they do. Are the prototypes sold to consumers? Of course I have no idea. I'd just hate to know that a prototype insulin pen was being beta tested on me (And that is the sort of thing people suggest Canon, Nikon, et al do all the time). I would think validation is company testing and for FDA approval insulin pens, food, etc. Not Cameras which are regulated by other entities.), but not to sell to consumer. Those are just my thoughts. I have no idea what goes on in the world of diabetic products. Seems a prototype insulin pen sold to a consumer for validation (unwitting beta testing) could spell death.

I don't think I said or implied that prototype = 1 or 2 units though. I just quoted the definition. I just don't believe any company ships prototypes to sell to consumers as unwitting beta testers.

From the printed circuit board perspective, prototype boards never get to end users to unwittingly beta test the product. It just doesn't happen. It could spell doom for a company. If the board is a multilayer (sometimes up to 50-60 layers back then) on a back plane with embedded components and micro-vias that cost tens of thousands of dollars (sometimes more than $100,000+) each to manufacture (materials only), they were done one at a time until the process was right. Once the process was validated and the product could be produced consistently... then it was produced for the customer who sold their product (containing our boards) to the end user.

Even software companies notify the user that a piece of software is "beta". Usually the beta product is free or at nominal cost.

There are people that think Canon or Nikon sell cameras to unwitting consumers to beta test. I just don't believe it and would like those folks to show documentation for such. Until then, I guess that is just a rumor (conspiracy theory?).

I also worked in the food industry for several years (Proctor & Gamble). We had test panels or focus groups for products. However, we never manufactured a product, sent it to store shelves, and hoped for the best. We even had to flavor test the product every 30 mins at the production line to make sure it was right. We even flavor tested the oil used in the processors (Pringles) during manufacturing to make sure it was right.

Proctor & Gamble enlisted employee families to test diapers (Pampers, etc.). The volunteers were given free diapers, but had to weigh each one at change time to see how they "held up". Never did P&G manufacture a prototype for end users to beta test.

At any rate, the sales and finance guys never came along and said, "Good enough. let's start shipping and test it out on consumers." What a nightmare that would be.

I just do not believe Canon or Nikon, or Sony, etc. do any beta testing on end users. I might get flamed for saying so by somebody that just got off the phone with a friend of a friend who works at Canon. I hope not, but oh well.

I hope all of you have a wonderful day!

 

[Djaaf]

You're pretty much right that finance or sales don't decide alone on the release date of a product. It's a lot more messy than that.

What generally happens, in my experience, is that engineering gives the date it thinks the product will be ready for. Then Production says when they'll have sufficient number of the product ready to ship. Then marketing gives the date all the marketing materials, ad services, tv spot reservation, etc... will be ready. Then you got the sales department giving a date for the education of the sellers on the new product, etc...

what happens next is that the dates get moved around a bit (engineering getting unexpected trouble with a component, Production gets a fire or a flood in one of the factories, etc...). And sometimes... you can't move the release date because of external factors (big show already planned with celebrities or politics, etc...). So... you get something out, hoping for the best and you continue to update the product in the backrooms to get a fix on what you see on the first batch...

Djaaf.

 

[Ozarker]

You're pretty much right that finance or sales don't decide alone on the release date of a product. It's a lot more messy than that.

What generally happens, in my experience, is that engineering gives the date it thinks the product will be ready for. Then Production says when they'll have sufficient number of the product ready to ship. Then marketing gives the date all the marketing materials, ad services, tv spot reservation, etc... will be ready. Then you got the sales department giving a date for the education of the sellers on the new product, etc...

what happens next is that the dates get moved around a bit (engineering getting unexpected trouble with a component, Production gets a fire or a flood in one of the factories, etc...). And sometimes... you can't move the release date because of external factors (big show already planned with celebrities or politics, etc...). So... you get something out, hoping for the best and you continue to update the product in the backrooms to get a fix on what you see on the first batch...

Djaaf.

Yes.