captken Loc: San Antonio, TX

What he said.[/quote]

Hey gang...chill! As a two tour vet of Nam and having served 36 years in the military I think I'm plenty capable of getting mad when necessary. Now is not the time. I disagree with his assessment of Kodak overall. But individual companies did very well against them. Agfa and Fuji had their strong points and could beat Kodak in some areas. But Kodak made contributions in so many areas. Yeah...I think this dude is wrong but but let's not get all "my country...love it or leave it" on him. BTW, I have NO love for protesters as a Sailor based in Oakland during the 60's and 70's. Getting spit and yelled at is no fun. But this is not an anti-American protest...it's just a comment about a company that's getting it's butt kicked right now.

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

actually read his last line about just another american company... If he lives here he should support the home team. as the old saying goes when in Rome do as the romans do. If he hates american companies so much, he dose not have to live here, he can go to cuba and see how the communists do it.

nyweb2001

Living in Rochester, I myself, and the rest of the town, would love to see Kodak thrive. When I worked there I was one of 60,000 workers at Kodak Park, now there's less than 2000. I had fun in the darkrooms all day and got paid ! We all used Kodak film, as well as papers and chemicals (for those of us with home darkrooms). A disappointment was their digital cameras. I still buy Kodak film and use Kodak paper, although there's better out there ! I wish they could turn around....property values around them have dropped, businesses have folded, it's a major blow to this town along with General Motors having pulled out !

pdwoodswood Loc: Lewisville, NC

Hey gang...chill! As a two tour vet of Nam and having served 36 years in the military I think I'm plenty capable of getting mad when necessary. Now is not the time. I disagree with his assessment of Kodak overall. But individual companies did very well against them. Agfa and Fuji had their strong points and could beat Kodak in some areas. But Kodak made contributions in so many areas. Yeah...I think this dude is wrong but but let's not get all "my country...love it or leave it" on him. BTW, I have NO love for protesters as a Sailor based in Oakland during the 60's and 70's. Getting spit and yelled at is no fun. But this is not an anti-American protest...it's just a comment about a company that's getting it's butt kicked right now.[/quote]

photosbyhenry Loc: Apple Valley MN

This is what I said. Someone tagged another comment to me.

RixPix Loc: Miami, Florida

Kodak's patent portfolio has been valued at around 3 billion dollars. That is a pretty good chunk of change. My guess is that they will sell off every aspect of their business that requires some form of labor or marketing and just manage their licensing fees. That is what has happened to virtually every other established American brand in the past decade. Imagine collecting money for doing nothing but permitting others to use your ideas.

mawyatt Loc: Clearwater, Florida

Kodak had some of the early digital camera technology in sensors called CCD (Charge Coupled Device), which was invented at Bell Labs....where else (don't get me going on Bell Labs!!). For awhile this was the standard high end digital image sensor and Kodak made some very good ones, they among the most sensitive and lowest noise sensors available (big astro-photography following).

CMOS technology was following the digital revolution (Moore's Law) and eventually CMOS sensors caught up with CCD in sensitivity and noise, but at a lower price point. In the commerical semiconductor world CMOS rules, and as we know now so is the case in image sensors.

Since the sensor is probably the most expensive component in a digital camera body, CMOS based digital cameras could be competive with CCD based cameras performance-wise but at a lower price point. Today just about every digital camera is CMOS based.

I don't believe Kodak ever caught on to the CMOS train, and this really hurt them in the digital camera business and contributed to their problems.

Other's will follow Kodak's path too, as we focus on bailouts, litigation, wellfare and corruption while other nations focus on the technology future. Almost every modern device from autos, to the internet, to TVs, to computers, iPads, to iPods, to SmartPhones, to GPS, to WiFi and our beloved digital cameras all are here, or in much better form because of semiconductor technology. Yet our own government chooses not to significantly invest in this semiconductor future, while others governments do.

It seems we as a nation are following Kodak's and Poloroid's path.

RobertMaxey

You are so wrong.

captken Loc: San Antonio, TX

Since all of us are interested in Kodak's success (or lack thereof) I thought I'd share this article with you.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/30/kodak-loses-a-third-board-member-this-week-2/

RobertMaxey

Do not bother with that person, sinatraman. Clearly he or she needs to learn a little something about Kodak and what they once provided. Clearly and without question, one can question just how much printing he has actually done.

RobertMaxey

I wonder what Kodak would be like in a few years if they started advertising film, pushing the products and adding new materials like paper, chemicals, films.

Vast numbers of people--professionals and amateurs--shoot digital and I suspect that not allot of people these days will not spend the money for prints when they have digital cameras.

Perhaps Kodak is nearing an end and there is no saving the company. Or, perhaps if Kodak added new films, brought back Kodachrome, emphasized film and stopped their digital efforts, people might decide to use more film.

rayford2 Loc: New Bethlehem, PA

With the cost of film, developing and printing, and no image preview on a film camera that would be an impossible sell to the public.

The convenience of digital photography has dwarfed the film industry to a few manufacturers who did not have the overhead the huge Eastman Kodak had.

The sad fact is that Kodak, like so many other US companies, is cursed with stockholder greed and in doing so they elect marketing CEO's instead of people who know how to engineer and make things. The Kodak name will be around but it likely will be licensed (sold) to someone connected with a foreign company, just like Polaroid, etal.