Maybe it’s a bit like those old washing powder ads – “New version cleans better than old version. Remember the last ad where we showed you spotless whites – now in this advert here’s old version and look at those grubby patches” (and none of them worked on my karate suit). Rumours are with the washing powder they ramp down the strength before each marketing push, and of course the companies are one company that competes with itself. These are just rumours of course.
I’ve just received a similar email advert for Version 4 of my monitor calibrator. Sadly my monitor won’t hold calibration at the moment – so it’s new monitor or take this one to bits some time. Back at the time version 3 was marketed as accurate and able to work on a wide gamut monitor I may buy in the future. To be fair I’ve been pleased with it since I worked out that the green cast in the shadows was coming from the room light when it calibrated. I have to calibrate in complete darkness. When I print at a pro lab and select “Use my colour calibration” I get very reasonable results. And yet in my email an ad for Version 4 which seems a bit like a washing powder ad – only did I buy the wrong thing when I bought my version 3?
There is an article at Imaging Resource.
An interesting question is what exactly does 26% more accurate mean? I assume you can measure error as a distance between measured and actual – so what is the effect on error magnitude (and what is the error magnitude anyway?)