Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kodak-Branded Smartphones On the Way

Posted by samzenpus on from the shake-to-call dept.

An anonymous reader sends news about Kodak's latest attempt to come back from the grave. "For a while there it looked like Kodak's moment had come and gone, but the past few months have seen the imaging icon fight back from the brink of irrelevance. Now the company's planning to push a Kodak-branded smartphone, and thankfully it's not going to sue everyone in the business along the way this time. To be clear, Kodak won't actually make its own devices — instead, it's going to farm out most of the development work to an English company called Bullitt."

19 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. Ok.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Old school company decides it's way out of bankruptcy is to compete in a market where one leader takes more profit than all the other competitors put together, and the other leader has more market share than anyone else. What could possibly go wrong?

    Sorry guys, you should be looking to sell Kodak-licensed camera tech to the big smartphone vendors.

    1. Re:Ok.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      That apostrophe is confusing. Is it that hard to learn the difference between it's and its?

    2. Re: Ok.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apparently it's. Many people have trouble with it.

  2. Bullitt by GoddersUK · · Score: 3, Funny

    sounds suspiciously like... (clue: bs)

  3. Umm, no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's not Kodak, as they are dead. In their dying spasm they sold their name so it can be placed on mediocre rebadged crap. It's disingenuous to talk about Kodak as if their lineage of innovation continues, and isn't just some jerkoffs who bought a famous brand name and are pushing trash and stomping that name into ground until all possible profit can be reamed loose.

    1. Re:Umm, no. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Pretty much identical to what happened to 'Polaroid'. Every corpse has its maggots, I suppose.

    2. Re:Umm, no. by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's not Kodak, as they are dead. In their dying spasm they sold their name so it can be placed on mediocre rebadged crap.

      Pretty much identical to what happened to 'Polaroid'. Every corpse has its maggots, I suppose.

      While it's true that this *is* what happened to Polaroid- that is, the original company is effectively dead and liquidated (*) and the post-2001 "Polaroid" is an unrelated company that bought the name (**) and some of the assets- it technically *isn't* what happened to Kodak.

      The present-day Kodak is still the same company. They went into bankruptcy protection, were forced to sell some things off, (***) and then emerged from that about 18 months ago.

      That's not to say that they won't be indulging in name licensing anyway, and in this case it's unclear how much- if any- involvement Kodak themselves will have in the manufacture of this phone, or its sale.

      In fact, before the bankruptcy it was clear to me that Kodak's problem was that in order to stay afloat in the short term they were being forced to sell off everything that would enable them to survive in the long term (i.e. patents and technical assets). My guess was that- at best- Kodak would survive as a massively pared down shadow of its former self, and at worst would be entirely liquidated and its name sold off to be whored out for its recognition in rebranding cheap generic electronics made by anonymous manufacturers in the Far East (a la "Polaroid").

      Then again, even if the core of the "original" Kodak survives with ownership of its name intact, it's open to question how meaningful this would be if most of what made it "Kodak" had been sold off and it had to become little more than a brand-licensing operation anyway.

      (*) As far as I can tell, the original Polaroid still "exists", but only as a dormant (and renamed) legal entity that conducts no business and I'm assuming is kept on life support for purely legal reasons related to liabilities after the bankruptcy.

      (**) Actually, AFAICT, the company that bought the Polaroid name (apparently quite dubious) themselves went bankrupt, so I'm not sure if the current owners are actually "Polaroid 3"(!!!) Not that it matters much. To be fair, the current owners do appear to be trying to use Polaroid's legacy more respectfully as far as cameras go (e.g. portable printers and cameras with that Lady Gaga tie-up a couple of years back), but they're still continuing the previous owner's model of licensing the name out to third-party distributors who use it to rebrand low-quality generic LCD TVs et al.

      (***) I'm not entirely clear what was sold off. One report suggested (if I read it correctly) that they were going to give the film business to the UK pension fund to settle liabilities there, but from what I can tell that's not actually what happened in the end, and Kodak themselves still control the film business.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  4. Smartphone with 50 Megapixel CCD sensor ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    The only way Kodak can really make a difference in the already crowded smartphone market is to equip the Kodak branded smartphone with its own 50 Megapixel CCD sensor

    If Kodak can do that then it has a fighting chance

    If Kodak can't, hey, it won't be that much difference from yet-another-reference-design smartphone, aka, the " white-box "

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re: Smartphone with 50 Megapixel CCD sensor ? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2

      A 100% "open" phone is only important to a small minority of phone buyers. Such a phone would not give Kodak any kind of significant market share based on that alone. A better camera *might* do something for sales, but really, Kodak's days are over.

      Perhaps they should have focused on high-end image platforms to compete with Canon and Nikon?

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  5. Turn the device inside out by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    Instead of calling the device a smartphone equipped with a 50 MP camera, they can market it as a 50 MP camera which is 4G/5G/6G enabled, plus it can make phone calls too

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  6. Kodak died with Kodachrome by AndyKron · · Score: 2

    There is no Kodak. Fuck whatever is calling itself Kodak today. Kodak died with Kodachrome in 2010.

    1. Re:Kodak died with Kodachrome by ls671 · · Score: 2

      My name is John Kodak you insensitive clod.

      https://www.facebook.com/john....

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  7. Re:Vintage name phones by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    I kinda miss Radio Shack... The shops were branded "Tandy" over here, and disappeared some time in the 90s, but as a kid I spent many hours in that shop. I might still have my Free Battery Club card somewhere!

    Anyway, I'm holding out for a Commodore smart phone!

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  8. Re:Vintage name phones by Going_Digital · · Score: 2

    No shops any more but Tandy is still on-line http://www.tandyonline.co.uk/ although mostly electronic components. Tandy is now separate from Radio Shack but some of those components and part numbers are the same as 30 years ago so.

  9. Re:Kodak is dead by Going_Digital · · Score: 2

    Likely a simple brand licensing arrangement, where a unknown company (usually a Chinese company not known in the west) wants to sell their products in the western market and needs a familiar name to convince people to buy. What typically happens though is cheap rubbish has a well known brand put on it to make it sell only to eventually destroy the brand.

  10. "moment" by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For a while there it looked like Kodak's moment had come and gone

    Kodak was a dominant technology corporation for over a century. They were dominant through economic downturns, world wars, cultural changes and across industrial sectors. They were one of a handful of the most recognizable brand names of the entire 20th century (they started in 1888). They did business in three centuries.

    I'm pretty sure that qualifies as more than a "moment".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  11. Watch out for Uncle Ben's by Argilo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Kodak is going to face some stiff competition from Uncle Ben's! http://www.theonion.com/articl...

  12. I'd like a Pan Am smartphone... by dpbsmith · · Score: 2

    ... I'd love a Studebaker smartphone, but I would die for an Exidy Sorcerer smartphone.

    --

    "How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!

  13. Re:Laugh by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Funny

    the only thing is these days everyone wants their junk to be small.

    That's not what the spam in my inbox says.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.