So to speak. :-)

As Ben's link above points out, Kodak has been doing digital photography for years and they still do. They also still do film.

Part of Kodak's problems were due to heavy competition from [link|http://internationalecon.com/fairtrade/fairpapers/ddaniels.html|Fuji]. Whether the competition was fair or otherwise, I can't say. There was also the expensive battle with Polaroid in the 1980s over instant cameras.

But Kodak is still around, and according to [link|http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/annualReport04/financials.shtml|this] they had $13.5B in sales and 55,000 employees in 2004. They did have a big restructuring charge, but they're not in horrible shape.

A better example of a company that was done in by digital imaging was [link|http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20050427-1329-polaroid-bankruptcy.html|Polaroid]. E.g. almost no-one uses film for microscope or oscilloscope cameras any more. And you don't see camera phones that spit out polariods. ;-) Their [link|http://www.dpreview.com/news/0110/01101201polaroidch11.asp|stock price] went from $60.31 to $0.28 in a little over 4 years. Digital photography ate Polaroid and resulted in its bankruptcy. (Yes, a company called [link|http://www.polaroid.com|Polaroid] exists now, with some of the same products, but it's not the same entity. It was purchased for its brand name (they sell TVs and DVD players too now)).

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who seems to be in a contrary mood on this topic. :-)