antss said:
Alex said:
The story of course is they wanted to make a small and light package. Why on earth should they absolutely -have to- make the base the same height as a systainer
But it would have been nicer had they included the feet with the saw. It's just 2 dollars worth of plastic. But there you have Festool's rip off marketing methods.
Uh........because it's a system
because they claim to only release a tool with improvements
because they claim to have better engineering
because they're other saw is made that way
Nicer [doh]
Why use an add on to solve an issue that could have been eliminated during design and manufacturing ?
Weight , my foot. A second year industrial design student could easily give you a few ways to increase the height without adding weight.
This seems like a case of the product manager deciding that the band aid for the product's shortcomings should be paid for by the customer.
Now, the customer pays in the end anyway - but it never ceases to amaze me how Festool nickel and dimes users in haphazard and inconsistent way.
I've raised this point before - don't they beta test this stuff in the field before release? And if so who's testing it ? It would appear that the faithful are not consulted.
And honestly is anyone going to buy one of these in the 110v version given its big brother's motor issues.
Part of the problem with medium size enterprises is the relative scarcity of R&D resources. The "big boys", much larger highly capitalised conglomerates like Bobby Bosch or the Asian triumvirate of TTI, Makita & Hitachi, have billions available. Yet, despite the very best intentions & expenditure they still make some spectacular mistakes.
Ever the innovator, the early development & release of new technologies hasn't always served Makita well. Some tools have been abysmal failures: the combi drill/hammer/rattler, the first generation of lithium cells & chargers, their initial run of three speed drills, their first cordless grinders were typically sub-par. Yet their innovative strategies have lead to triumphs too: their rattlers, the first rechargeable drills and lithium powered tools. In Makita's case, the sheer depth and breadth of ranging has allowed their triumphs to far outweigh their mistakes.
In comparison, much smaller enterprises such as the Tooltechnic group can ill afford to make, or even worse, acknowledge, mistakes. To do so would be in diametric & philosophical opposition to the corporate ethos of innate superiority. Aberrant product releases must instead be quietly allowed to disappear, lest the current company's reputation, carefully manicured by marketing, market positioning & pricing policies suffer negative setbacks.
Unfortunately, the need to maintain an "Über alles" market position requires a risk-averse innovation-light development strategy. Smaller enterprises can be much more readily "undone" financially from gross mistakes, especially those positioning themselves as "haute couture" in their particular marketplace. Not to mention the fickle nature of the fashionistas and other potential clientele in the rarified upper end of consumerist fantasies. It's simply "safer" to learn from the mistakes & successes of others.
This continued aversion to risk, coupled with limited developmental resources, can however become a deadly combination in this rarified atmosphere: it can be truly " tough at the top". Damned if you do (innovate), damned (or even worse be regarded as boring) if you don't.
The bigger Keiretsu, cashed up conglomerates, Public enterprises & horizontally & vertically integrated enterprises have an opportunistic & envious eye permanently focussed on any perceived competitor's market share. With vastly superior resources, economies of scale and production capabilities that dwarf the likes of Festo/Narex, it is of little surprise that we see the batons of innovation, reliability & even quality being passed on to newer hands. Only in that most fickle of parameters - exclusivity - does Festo have any legitimate claim to leadership these days.
One may no longer feel quite so assured of continued customer loyalty, especially if one is perceived as deficient in corporate loyalty. The reciprocity of this arrangement is an essential aspect of long-term corporate associations and social contracts, whether it be between an enterprise & its customer base, a government & the governed, or in a master/servant relationship of employment. Reward must be mutual, respect prevalent & equity paramount. History is littered with the messy results of the inequities, abuses & disrespect between contractual partnerships. Any organisation that ignores these non-codified but intrinsic social & moral parameters does so at its peril. If I lived on another continent the net price of a particular sander would be about ONE TENTH of the price that I'm actually obliged to pay....
Yes, they can certainly trade for some time on the strength of their past reputation, but in a contemporary competitive marketplace, where innovations tend to be more closely guarded and the spirit of corporate pooling of resources that was always a feature of post war German enterprise long gone, it is only a matter of time before any "banked" balance of goodwill is squandered by any real or perceived unresponsiveness to legitimate customer concerns about product performance, safety or reliability. There will always be somebody to candidly declare that the Emperor is indeed naked, and ever a hungry competitor ready & willing to acquire new customers.
Festo, I fear your days are numbered. You've become boring.
