You have to give credit where credit is due.
Three years ago, Arecont introduced the idiotic Pixels Per Dollar metric.
On the one hand, it is clearly reductionistic, ignoring image quality issues like WDR, low light performance, lensing, and simply not breaking regularly. On the other hand, unknowingly, Arecont laid out the key driving force in how the market has moved against them in the past 3 years.
Still ** **
******* ** ***** ******** ** ***** Pixels *** ******, ** *****'* *** newsletter ********* [**** ** ****** *********]:
"*** ** *****, *** ******** ******** labored **** *********** ************ *** ******* that ******* **** * ********** ** about ***,*** ******. *** ****** ** pixels *** ******, * *** ** measure ****** ** **********, ** **** a ****** ***** ** ***** *,***, Schafer *********.
*** ******** *** ******; ********* ****** see *** ***** ** ******; *** they ****** **** ******* ****** ** cars. ** ********, * *** ******, also ***** ** **** *****, ****** about *,*** ****** *** ******. ** the **** *** ** *** ******, a **** ****** ****** **,*** ****** per ******."
****** *** ** ******* **** *** know *** ********** ******* ***** *** pixels, *** ******, **** ** *** expect?
******: *** *** **-****** *** ******* here [**** ** ****** *********], ********** the ***** / ****** ******* ** well ** ******** *** ********** ** specific *** *****.
*******
** **** ****, ******* ** ******** an ** ****** ****** ***** $*** (i.e., ***,*** ****** ** *,*** ****** per ******). ** ******, **** *** not **** * ***** ***, *** it ** **** **** **** *****.
** *** ********, *** ******* ** MP ******* **** *********, ****$*** ** *************** *********** *** ** ****** ******** *** market ** *** $** ** *****.
****** *** ****** ******, ** ****** as ** **, **** ***** *** point ***** *** ******'* *****. * 2MP $*** ****** ******** **,*** ****** per ******, **** **** **** *******'* own ***** *** ***** **** *******.
*** ******* ****** ************ ** ******** *** **** ************ anyway:
"*** ****** ***'* ***** ****** *******'* be ** **,” [*******'*] ******* ****. “Somewhere ******* *** *** **** ** probably ***** *** ****** ** ******** your ***** ** *** *** **** value *** **** ******.”
** *** ********, *******'* ******* *** remained ****** ******, *** ******* ** aggressively ******* ****** **** **** **** used **, ******* *** ******* **** on ***, *** *****, **** *****, etc. ***** ******** *** ******** *** some, *** ** *******'* *** ****** shows, ***** *** * *** ** buyers *** ***** ****** ** *** cost, *******'* *********** ********, ***** ** now ****.
Either SIA or Arecont does not know the difference between bytes and pixels, but really, what do you expect?
Maybe it was a subtle jab at the 5MB camera outlined in the Samsung Techwin Vision, since the Arecont model has twice the resolution storage. ;)
I am curious when SIA/Arecont will correct it? The far bigger issue is the blind focus on pixels per dollar while their competitors beat them on that metric. However, confusing bytes and pixels repeatedly shows technological illiteracy.
The far bigger issue is the blind focus on pixels per dollar while their competitors beat them on that metric.
Agreed.
IMHO, the reason they do it is because they would like to believe (and have YOU believe) that their competitors are Axis and Sony, not Hikua. Which, was more, if never fully true, five years ago.
Btw, cameras with 20,000 pixels per dollar are for suckers, my minimum is 100,000...
"would like to believe (and have YOU believe) that their competitors are Axis and Sony, not Hikua"
And years ago, that was true. Arecont was the low cost, bare bones alternatives to the higher priced full feature Axis, Sony and Panasonic offerings. However, Hikvision/Dahua has supplanted Axis for that position and now Arecont is caught between much lower cost offerings from the Chinese and better quality / better brand offerings from the Japanese (Sony, Panasonic, Canon subsidiary Axis).
Arecont Vision, Glendale, Calif., was the first camera manufacturer to break many barriers, delivering security cameras with higher and higher resolutions of 2MB to 10MB in pixels.*
"And how would you like your bytes, sir?" "In pixels, large pixels..."
*SIA approved MP to MB converter
#Math-challenged and the English isn't great either...
"The answer isn't every camera shouldn't be 10 MB,”
Strangest double-negative I've seen in a long time. That parses out to "the answer is every should camera should be 10MB", setting a new land-speed record for most errors in under 10 words.
Lol. But consider the parallel sentence
"The answer isn't: Every criminal shouldn't get 10 years."
This actually means "Some criminals should get 10 yrs."
Lol! Isn't English a wonderful language?
So I guess if you apply precedence to the isn't and shouldn't, you end up with "every camera shouldn't be 10 MB" is not the answer. Which is technically correct_ that definitely isn't the answer.
Returning to John's opener:
You have to give credit where credit is due.
Yes, Scott's dated message is definitely worthy of a little eye-rolling, but we are usually willing to cut sales guys some slack here because "they're just doing their job." And as idiotic as PixelsPerDollar may be, for Arecont at least, it's better than a lot of other possible metrics, like MTBF* of ANSF/C**.
The MB/MP gaffe though is likely to leave a longer negative impression, because it makes us contemptuously think "he is clueless" instead of the normal audience sentiment of "he thinks WE are clueless".
Which is a bit unfair to Mr. Schafer, because almost undoubtedly he didn't make the mistake. Why? Consider that it was delivered orally by a veteran of the industry, who had likely given the same spiel numerous times previously and was likely transcribed wrong because of the similarity of the 'B' and 'P' sounds.
And consider if he HAD actually clearly said MB 5 times instead of MP; surely the author of the article didn't know the difference either. Only a extremely passive-aggressive editor would have quoted him correctly...
Not to mention Scott Schafer is the Secretary of the the Board at SIA. And judging by his bio image in relation to the others on the board, knows the value of a pixel.
*Mean Time Between Failure
*Average Number of Stuck Filters / Camera
Another problem with that newsletter. It lists a large end user who has not given Arecont permission to use them in marketing. The end user also confirmed to IPVM that the statement Arecont made was not accurate either.
Manufacturers, please do not use end users in public statements unless (1) you have express written permission and (2) are making accurate statements about your activity with them. Related: Warning: Case Studies Can Get You Sued
Update: SIA has re-issued the article here, correcting the bytes / pixels mistake as well as removing the references to specific end users.
The more fundamental problem (that the numbers are wrong and that it shows Arecont's competitive decline) remain.