|
|
Posted by Specs on 12/20/05 21:57
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
news:11qg4nhrpnhlm6f@corp.supernews.com...
> "Martin Heffels" wrote ...
> >I have been sleeping a bit ;-) but at the moment this is
> > the most spoken about camera-design. First non-working
> > mock at NAB 2006.
> >
> > http://www.red.com/
>
> A new low watermark in style vs. content.
> You could never tell from their website that it wasn't
> a couple of high school kids with a new graphics program.
>
> > On http://www.hdforindies.com/ you can fill in a wishlist.
>
> I suppose that is one marketing scheme. Let others generate
> the hype for you. Didn't read about anything that hasn't been
> done by others already. I guess they didn't have the cool
> graphics, though.
Absolutely spot on. The Oakleys dude clearly knows his marketing. :)
I've had a lurk on several of the "camera" fora such as DVinfo and DVXuser
etc and its been really amusing watching the same old characters that appear
on every forum on the internet spouting speculative bullshit about a camera
that exists only on a fag-packet. They seem to go from one board to the
next to conduct exactly the same conversations and debates as they conducted
on the previous. They are like dogs marking their territories. Don't these
people work for a living?
So the so called RED camera. Designed or not, any good businessman knows
that one doesn't risk ones own money (he hasn't risked any money on the
website yet!) on a new venture you get investors to share the risk. How do
you get partners? Why not whip up a little interest. So enlist the help of
the interweb geeks....
So this is how business is going to use the so called Web 2.0. RED using
www.hdforindies.com, you saw it there first!
{o}{o}
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|