Re: Nano-scam B.S. coming to camera companies

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:00:44 -0700, RichA <rander3127@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The only claim I make regarding this is that "nano" is a cheap add-on
word that indicates NOTHING different from any other coating process.
If the coating process is new, they should have thought up a truly
descriptive less silly name for the it. Saying "nano coating" is like
saying swimming fish. Gradient coating would have been much better,
but it doesn't have that mindless, trendy ring to it.

So you're retracting your claim that it's a scam, and now claiming
it's just a bad name?

Guess what? Nikon doesn't use the name nano-coating. The names Nikon
use are "nano crystal coating" and "nano crystal coat."

Nano crystals are a legitimate area of technology and have a meaningful
definition. For example, see:
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Research-Review/Magazine/2001/Fall/features/02Nanocrystals.html

So the process is real, the effect is real, and the name is descriptive
of the technology being used to achieve that effect. It sounds like
your beef is with someone else's contraction or your own ignorance.

--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

.