|Re: No, realists|
Message #18 Posted by DaveJ on 22 May 2007, 8:56 a.m.,
in response to message #16 by James M. Prange (Michigan)
I agree that it's a real shame that HP stopped producing high-end engineering tools. Of course actually, the high-end engineering tools were split off into the new Agilent, with the "new HP" concentrating on the "consumer products". Too bad that the calculator division didn't go to Agilent, but I can see some logic in keeping it with the computer products, within HP.
To me, it would've made more sense to keep the HP name on the high-end products and split off the "commodity" products into a separate company.
Indeed. HP was known as an electronics test equipment company first and foremost, and that name change was hard on the industry. Most engineers I know still call Agilent gear HP.
It would have been much easier to rename the computer and consumer part, as that is common in that industry and hardly anyone would have cared I suspect.
The market for calculators as "consumer" and "educational" products is just too big to ignore; too bad that HP was so late trying to break into it.
I don't see any reason why HP couldn't have kept making a line of high-end engineering calculator models as well as ordinary consumer and educational models.
Simple - money, profit, margin, sales, "lean" processes, product range rationalising and all that other finance and management stuff.
Managers love to can stuff that isn't the leading seller, gives them something to put on their monthly report. If sales drop xx% in the last year or two, out it goes, even if it still pulls in $$$$$$$$ per year.
Why did they keep the 12C and drop the scientific models? - you can bet your last dollar that it sold more, *lots* more than the scientific ones.
I suspect it would have required someone really high up with a love for the old models to keep them in production.
I suspect sales dropped off on the older models when the graphic units became all the rage. Sales never recovered and they got dropped from the line. That happens in almost every industry.
Inexpensive? Well, I can't think of any electronic device that isn't either much less expensive or else much more powerful than a few decades ago. What I do object to is the "cheap" look and feel and low quality physical design and construction of the 49 series. That said, it does seem to me that HP has made some efforts to improve things lately. As for the design of the 33S, what were they thinking? It looks more like a child's hand-held video game than a calculator, and this is the model that I'd expect to have the most functional appearance.
I really don't think that HP intended to offend you or me or anyone else, it just made some (bad, in my opinion) business decisions.
I greatly doubt it was a *bad* business decision, just *usual* business for most big companies like that.