Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: frederick <lost@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:21:53 +1300
G.T. wrote:
"frederick" <lost@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1193775840.860354@xxxxxxxxxxSubtle difference.
If a car maker withdrew a car from the market, but offered repairs only for existing owners, then I think the car owners would have reason to be more than a little pissed off.
You make it sound like they're permanently withdrawing that model camera from the market. What do you expect them to do? Continue letting the cameras be sold without fixing them? No, they're RECALLING them to fix them. You know Rich the Troll used the word "withdrawn", not Canon.
With respect, shipments are stopped, shelf stock is recalled, the 1DIII _is_ "withdrawn" from the market.
So what whether it's permanent or not?
I didn't see a comment in Canon's letter saying "we'll start shipping repaired units immediately" - in fact the impression given by that letter is that they know there's a problem, but still haven't finalised the fix.
When the camera is re-released, then perhaps owners can heave a sigh of relief. Until then, their $5k cameras hang under a bit of a cloud. I know I'd be seriously pissed off, even if I knew or thought I knew the AF was okay on the camera I had.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: Paul J Gans
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- References:
- 1dIII withdrawn
- From: frederick
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: Pete Stavrakoglou
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: jean
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: frederick
- Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- From: G.T.
- 1dIII withdrawn
- Prev by Date: Re: So long
- Next by Date: Re: 40D works well for birds in flight
- Previous by thread: Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- Next by thread: Re: 1dIII withdrawn
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|