From: John McWilliams on
nospam wrote:
> In article <KIydnXG5g6_WMb3UnZ2dnUVZ_rLinZ2d(a)comcast.com>, John
> McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> <http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-september-2008.
>> html>
>>> although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
>> Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
>> sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
>> as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
>> subscription $$ service).
>
> that, and it is unit sales, not dollar revenue. there are lots of ways
> to spin the numbers. in any event, nikon is not struggling.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough: I never said they were, don't
believe they are, and hope they continue to do very well.

>> Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
>> or E-mail client will do what. ....
>
> you need a better client that honors <> delimiters. on mine, the url
> is automatically highlighted as a clickable link, regardless of how
> many lines are used.

Better than Toth? Impossible! <s>

In any event, the link you posted, which was broken when I clicked on
it, is the one I fixed, and works now.

So, I wonder if others could say which link works, and which doesn't.
It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
the sending? It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?

--
John McWilliams
From: nospam on
In article <LNSdnXaIGZKmQr3UnZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d(a)comcast.com>, John
McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote:

> It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
> link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
> the sending?

sometimes thoth adds a space when wrapping and i guess it handles
spaces if a url wraps. that must have been one of those times.

> It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
> development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?

it hasn't.
From: Paul Furman on
John McWilliams wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>> In article <KIydnXG5g6_WMb3UnZ2dnUVZ_rLinZ2d(a)comcast.com>, John
>> McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> <http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-september-2008.
>>>
>>> html>
>>>> although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
>>> Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
>>> sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
>>> as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
>>> subscription $$ service).
>>
>> that, and it is unit sales, not dollar revenue. there are lots of ways
>> to spin the numbers. in any event, nikon is not struggling.
>
> Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough: I never said they were, don't
> believe they are, and hope they continue to do very well.
>
>>> Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
>>> or E-mail client will do what. ....
>>
>> you need a better client that honors <> delimiters. on mine, the url
>> is automatically highlighted as a clickable link, regardless of how
>> many lines are used.
>
> Better than Toth? Impossible! <s>
>
> In any event, the link you posted, which was broken when I clicked on
> it, is the one I fixed, and works now.
>
> So, I wonder if others could say which link works, and which doesn't.

Thunderbird broke on the first, worked on the second. With the old
Mozilla I had to use the angle brackets but not t-bird when sending.
Wrapped links actually working would be nice :-)

> It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
> link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
> the sending? It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
> development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?
>


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: SMS on
Ray Fischer wrote:
> nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <ZKydnVSv2YYL273UnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d(a)comcast.com>, John
>> McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
>>>>> strategy.
>>>> struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
>>>> bigger issue is the economy.
>>> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
>>> Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
>>> parties. And please don't mention Google!
>> here's another report -- september 2008 sales, reported by popular
>> photography:
>
> Get real. One month's data means almost nothing. Pick another month
> and Canon could hold the top spots, depending on what cameras were
> recently released.

Canon sold far, far, more cameras than Nikon last year. However in
D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.

For 2008, it's likely that Nikon sold more D-SLRs than Canon, thanks to
the D40, though Canon will still lead in $ value of D-SLRs sold. Of
course Canon still sold far more cameras than Nikon when you include P&S
models.

Nikon wasn't even in the top 3 in terms of total units sold in 2007.
From: nospam on
In article <j67Uk.7253$yr3.7176(a)nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:

> However in
> D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
> at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.

so your own numbers show that isn't struggling like you said they were.