Sorry Dan, in all honesty, most of that is not "bitchiness" its just sarcasm. When i get annoyed, i get sarcastic. I sometimes type exactly how my head is thinking and it is misinterpreted. (Sometimes, rightfully so). It is hard to get points across in a typographical manner such as this. Please know, i am not "attacking" you. Or your Company. I am, however quite agressively questioning your methods for what should be a very simple statistical specification of a product.Wow- Marc that was really bitchy... =)
I shall eat crow. My apologies Dan, i did misinterpret your Lawyer statement. I read it as, "If i label this laser as "X Watts" with the following methodology, does it cover my ass when the actual calculations are lower" Hey, i can be wrong sometimes.apparently didn't read my post about the lawyer. Its being looked at not for accuracy but to see if it can or should have intellectual property protection. We spent a lot of time developing something new and frankly we have spent a lot of nights grumbling because someone has ripped off our something new and made it cheaply and worse.
You are correct. My responses are "impassioned" becasue I feel that our industry has enough negative connotations surrounding it. Our industry has enough of a stigma with it. Our industry is small enough and hard enough as it is to try and explain such "used car salesmen tactics" as numbers games. Honestly Dan, this is all all of this boils down to- Numbers games. I may have been a wise ass, sarcastic prick (sorry for that) in my original response, but what all of this is filtered down to is "How should i label a product i sell?" And in my professional opinion and most any other's professional opinion, if you sell something as 1 Watt, than it needs to be 1 Watt. not be labeled as 1 Watt but have other pages or descriptions or disclaimers or "what ifs" to exaplin why it may or may not be 1 Watt.Second, your absolutely impassioned response appears to have a lot more to do with other people than me because you have taken some of my points to the extreme in order to make them sound unethical
this is not sarcasm, i am asking the following in a serious manner-
If "John Smith" buys a 1 Watt Gren projector from you for (example) $10,000 but it only outputs 750/800mW, would you be willing to give them a refund of the difference between a 1W and say,a 750mW/800mW?? Again, i am not being sarcastic with that question. A 800mW projector and a 1W projector can't be the same price, therefore The customer should only have to pay for their effective power output of said product.
Again, my apologies. I am not being accusatory toward you. I am not calling you a liar or a thief. I said from the begining that i respect you and your company for talking with us. I am however seeing a trend here that was questioned months ago when all of this first came up with the X-Laser/Laserworld team up (or colaberation). We are discussing, debating, forming mathematical formulas on how to measure a laser beam and sell it to a customer. I dont know, maybe its me...i go back to what i have said a MILLION times- 1 Watt means 1 Watt. 500mW means 500mW. 750mW means 750mW.You post assumes me/us to be dishonest and incompetent and I take great pride in being neither.
this is 110% TRUE!! that is the point. Why does such a simple concept of metering a laser beam, require such in-depth and thought provoking formulas, theories, methodologies, calculations and explanations of its accuracy (or lack there of). this is my biggest gripe- turn Laser projector on, emit full power beam. If it outputs 1W, its a 1W projector. If it outputs 1.5W its a 1.5W projector. If it outputs 750mW, its a 750mW projector.Moreover and more importantly, you have no idea how our specifications correlate to anything else because you have both neither seen the method by which we calculate the power to determine its appropriateness or lack thereof nor have you touched one of our new projectors. You are simply making an assumption and then getting pissed about it.
i am sorry Dan, i just really cant wrap my head around the concept of selling something labeled as "X" but planting the seed prior to warn (or educate) why it most likely will not be that actual "X" product. No matter how accurate or thought provoking or detailed your description or method may be to justify the differences, it is just a way to say, "well, we said it may only be"UVW" and that it may not actually be "XYZ." This, as you can see, will automatically put 99% of any consumer on the defensive. It may be a correct statement and your explanation of why the differences occur are, i am sure, 100% correct, but why should it have to be used?
This, i think is great! i would love to take you up on your offer. this, in my opinion, is a very honorable and admirable offer. i know you are not doing anything to purposely decieve people. . I just would really love for you to just do what it seems is very simple- Label a system and sell a system as EXACTLY what it is supposed to be. But, i would love to come see your place. not just for the issues you offered above, but quite simply, just to see a bunch of lasers being built!I would like to personally invite you to visit our shop anytime you like and if we can arrange a mutually agreeable time I will happily give you both a tour and an in depth explanation of our compliance process, spec standards, and quality assurance process. I will ask you to sign an NDA about some of the specifics we consider proprietary but of course allow you to discuss it in a general way for the benefit of those here.i would sign whatever you want me to sign.
I am not looking to to call you out on anything. I am not looking to prove you wrong or me right. i guess i am just questioning the integrity of the process. not YOUR integrity but the integrity and misleading nature of the multiple levels of measurement accuracey. It is an avenue for confusion, inaccuraceys, distrust and false assumptions.THEN, you can call bulls**t if you still think that it is appropriate. And I will happily continue to come and answer questions. We have nothing to hide.
this is a very far fetched hypothetical situation i think. And would VERY easily be argued by any $5/ hour lawyer as sustainable variations in the technology. In the history of laser shows, companies, law suits and combinations there of i know of ZERO (i may be wrong) lawsuits of such silly claims and arguments. And *if* a lwayer tried to argue with only those points as "evidence of wrong doing," i think the case would be very rapidly laughed out of court. If the lawyer was unable to argue defense of power discrepincies, than the lawyer may need to re-think his/her profession of choice.the question in court becomes:
"Did you advise my client of the strength of the laser he was purchasing?"
"Yes, we sold the product as a three quarter watt laser."
"Could the laser reasonably have been emitting more than 750mW?"
"Um, yes... the measurement at certification was 800mW"
"So in other words, you failed to disclose the actual emission strength of your product by an amount TEN TIMES GREATER than an average person can own without a special license, correct?"
"It's not that simple..." ... and we're screwed.
*BUT* if we want to go that route, ill comromise with the theory-
Whatever maximum reading is taken on a brand new projector build (clean optics, brand new lasers, brand new electronics) at the aperture, sell the projector for that exact reading. And provide the certification/variance for such.
if its reading 1.145 Watts, sell it and certify it as a 1.145 Projector. Nothing more, nothing less.
We (everyone here) is in the same market. And this is why many people, including myself, get very annoyed as of late, when we see a person and/or company try to justify something that *may* mislead or deceive ones confidence in a poduct or company. Especially when it is something as simple as taking a power measurement. there is a reasonable assumption of simplicity with a measurement like this. there should not need to be formulas, disclaimers, theories or separate explanations to convey a reading other than what was assumed by a purchaser.as long as we are in a regulated industry with a product that carries the potential for harm, it is not as simple as it may seem when you are in the market we are in.
Dan,
I do apologize for coming off as disrespectful or in an "attacking" manner. you are correct, i dont know you or your company personally. you *do* seem like a stand up guy and your company does also. i cant and wont apologize for my questioning of your process of product labeling/measuring requirements. In my eyes, it just seems way too open ended and riddled with loopholes to provide a scapegoat for a consumer to not get what he/she paid for. It just doesnt sit right with me.
I, along with everyone here, really appreciate you coming here and talking to all of us about this. you have proven to be an ethical guy. i dont think anyone questions that. But what is questioned is the reasoning of it. It shouldnt have to be so overly involved and/or supported with "reasons why not..."
-Marc