macs = beta, wintels = vhs
Steve Sullivan
I had a doctors appointment yesterday. The doctor said he didnt know much
about computers, hasnt been on the net yet, but is thinking about getting
a internet account. I asked him what computer he has, he said a compaq
(aka a comptrash, from what I hear they are slower than comparable p2's).
I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
a mac. He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
happen to his computer (of course this is *GUARENTEED* to happen to any
computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
computer will be obsolete)
--
So many pedestrians, so little time.
Adam Bailey
In message <macghod-2506...@sdn-ar-001casbarp024.dialsprint.net>, Steve Sullivan <mac...@concentric.net> wrote...
>I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
>a mac. He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
>He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
>movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
>happen to his computer (of course this is *GUARENTEED* to happen to any
>computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
>computer will be obsolete)
I've always hated that argument, because the VCR is nothing like the
computer.
First, what if beta players had been able to read VHS tapes and beta
tapes? Would that have made a difference?
Second, the whole point of video is selection. People rarely go out for
just an action movie, they want *an* action movie. A particular title.
Software doesn't work that way. Most people just want any word processor,
any email package, etc. The average person will stick with a handful of
programs and never switch. Selection isn't as important to the computer
world.
With video, major titles were not being released on beta. With the Mac,
the vast majority of major titles are. The rest is pretty meaningless.
--
Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| "Do not take life too seriously;
ad...@tezcat.com | you will never get out of it alive."
ada...@aol.com | - Elbert Hubbard
Finger for PGP | http://www.tezcat.com/~adamb/
Salvatore Denaro
On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:11:07 -0700, Steve Sullivan <mac...@concentric.net> wrote:
>I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
>a mac.
That isn't always true...
> He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
>He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
>movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
>happen to his computer
He is repeating what the salesman told him.
>(of course this is *GUARENTEED* to happen to any
>computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
>computer will be obsolete)
My 5 year old VCR will play the newest movies, my three year old PC won't
play the newest games. Computer and VCRs are nothing alike.
--
s...@panix.com
Salvatore Denaro
Rick
Adam Bailey <ad...@tezcat.com> wrote:
> With video, major titles were not being released on beta. With the Mac,
> the vast majority of major titles are. The rest is pretty meaningless.
It is not meaningless. It is entirely accurate. Beta was first on the
scene. It was (and is) of much higher quality. VHS arrived and was
cheaper. people started buying the VHS in greater numbers. AFTER they
were buying higher numbers industry support began to fade for the more
expensive/higher quality beta. It is a very good comparison.
--
*** To reply via email remove nospam from my return address. ***
Nathan G. Raymond
In article <macghod-2506...@sdn-ar-001casbarp024.dialsprint.net> mac...@concentric.net (Steve Sullivan) writes:
>I had a doctors appointment yesterday. The doctor said he didnt know much
>about computers, hasnt been on the net yet, but is thinking about getting
>a internet account. I asked him what computer he has, he said a compaq
>(aka a comptrash, from what I hear they are slower than comparable p2's).
>
>movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
>computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
>computer will be obsolete)
I am so ABSOLUTELY sick and tired of EVERYONE getting the Beta vs. VHS
completely wrong, I would personally LOVE to smack every single computer
journalist who has ever written about this. Morons who don't do their
research should be banned from ever publishing again in print or online
magazines. I blame those journalists for brainwashing the masses.
http://www.urbanlegends.com/products/beta_vs_vhs.html
[1][INLINE] [2]The AFU and Urban Legend Archive
[3]Products
beta vs vhs
[Select a topic.] __
[4][INLINE]
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban
From: h...@unislc.slc.unisys.com (Helge Moulding)
Subject: AFU Whitepaper: The Decline and Fall of Betamax (Long)
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 19:34:04 GMT
AFU White Paper: The Decline and Fall of Betamax
The story of Sony's Betamax (TM) format is not an isolated one, but it
is instructive. It is also surrounded by legend and myth, so a closer
look at it might be useful.
Getting To the Table
The story begins long before 1974, when the technology to record video
data on magnetic tape was maturing. By itself, it doesn't sound like a
daunting task, until the sheer volume of data is considered. There is
a practical limit to the speed with which magnetic tape can be
transported past the read/write heads of a record/playback machine;
this limit was overcome almost a decade before Sony's home market
debut by designing a head that turned past the tape, and wrote it's
information on the tape at an angle.
If you've ever peered inside your VCR and wondered why that silvery
cylinder back in there wasn't sitting straight, you know now that the
basic technology hasn't changed in thirty years.
By the 1970s there were several Japanese industry giants poised to
deliver home video taping equipment. These machines had to be orders
of magnitude more reliable than the clumsy existing professional
machines, and Sony was the first to consider their efforts market
ready. According to James Lardner, author of _Fast Forward_ (New
American Library), Sony invited Matsushita and JVC to license the
Betamax technology in December 1974. [1]
Sony's Morita was apparently not aware that JVC was almost ready to
market their own machine, so may have come as a rude surprise to him
when JVC and Matsushita declined the offer. JVC believed it had a
better product, and didn't see that the Betamax offered anything new.
Moreover, Sony's overbearing attitude in this meeting may have made a
definite impression on JVC's engineers.
Upping the Ante
In any case, for a year Sony had the VCR market to itself, selling
30,000 Betamax VCRs in the US. [2] But when JVC came out with the VHS
format VCR in 1976, the stage was set for the format wars. JVC had a
machine that already doubled Sony's recording time of one hour, and
that difference would prove crucial.
By January 1977, JVC was joined by four more Japanese electronics
manufacturers to build and market VHS format VCRs. Then, in February,
Sony abandoned its long-standing policy against OEM deals and joined
forces with Zenith.
Matsushita struck back by attempting to recruit RCA. RCA indicated
that the VHS recording limit of two hours should be increased to three
or four, and six weeks later, a prototype was ready. In March RCA
joined the VHS camp.
Bidding for the Customer
While price later was less of a factor, in 1977 the VHS manufacturers,
led by Matsushita, got into the trenches. VCR prices dropped as they
became cheaper to make. RCA led by dropping prices $300 below the Sony
machine, which caused an avalanche of follow-on price cutting.
Eventually even Sony was forced to drop its price by $200. By 1982 the
price war was in full swing, and Sony was offering a $50 dollar rebate
as a "Home Improvement Grant." [6]
The comments from the sidelines were fairly equinamous. In September
1977, the Saturday Review declared that "Eventually, the public
learned to live with two record speeds [33 1/3 and 45 rpm], and
doubtless it will also resign itself to two videotape systems."
If nothing else, these comments showed that industry observers
themselves hadn't a clue about the technology involved in the VCR.
An Unexpected Joker
Few bits of USAn history are complete without involving lawyers. In
1979, a suit brought against Sony by Universal Studios and Disney was
getting into final arguments. At stake was the question if
manufacturers of VCRs were infringing on the copyrights of producers
of movies and TV programs.
The suit, which named only Sony, eventually left Universal and Disney
with no recourse except to consider how to make money from the new
technology. Sales of VCRs were apparently unaffected by talk of the
legal procedings.
However, even as late as September 1980, the word "Betamax" was used
by many as synonymous with "VCR." [3] It is possible that the court
case had consequences on Sony's marketing that have never been
considered. This is particularly notable when combined with the fact
that Sony's share of the VCR market had sunk to 19.1% in 1978,
compared to RCA's share of almost twice that at 36%.
Who's Stuck With the Old Maid?
As Sony's market share declined, the manufacturers of prerecorded VCR
tapes began to adjust their product lines. Already in January, 1981,
Betamax format VCRs accounted for merely 25% of the entire market, and
consumers were being warned that the selection for VHS would be
"slightly broader." [4]
The Finessed King
Technologically, the two formats were each other's equal. True, except
for the recording length, Sony pioneered most of the improvements over
the years, but the VHS manufacturers caught up to each improvement,
usually in less than a year. So, for instance, within a month of
Sony's announcement of Beta Hi-Fi, JVC and Panasonsic announced VHS
Hi-Fi formats. Interestingly, the two VHS formats were incompatible
with each other. [7]
Comparisons between VCRs with similar features showed no significant
differences in performance. In fact, most of the differences could
only be seen with sensitive instruments, and likely would never show
up on most consumer grade television sets. [5] In particular, the
qualitative differences between the two formats were less than the
differences between any two samples from the same manufacturer. [8]
Cheap Tricks
Possibly because of Beta's unpopularity, Beta VCRs were much cheaper
than similar VHS VCRs by the end of 1985. A Beta HiFi VCR could sell
for half the price of a VHS Hi-Fi VCR in 1984 [9], and by the end of
1985 Betas were selling for under $300. [10]
The Fat Lady Sings
In 1987, Rolling Stone announced that "The battle is over." [11] On
Jauary 10, 1988 Sony admitted to plans for a VHS line of VCRs. VHS
players commanded 95% of the VCR market. [12]
In May 1988, Video magazine came out with an article entitled "Beta
Survival Guide." [14] And in September Sony's first VHS recorders came
off its assembly lines. [15] A year later, the Betamax share of the
consumer VCR market had dropped to less than 1%. [16]
Today the format is still around. In 1994, Video magazine published
another survival guide, explaining that the scarcity of blank Beta
tapes has consumers buying up prerecorded tapes at fire sale prices,
to record over them. [17]
Counting up the Points
Sony did not commit the sins ascribed to them by most of the pundits
explaining the demise of Betamax.
1. Sony did not "refuse to license Betamax."
In its January 25 issue, Time explained that "While at first Sony kept
its Beta technology mostly to itself, JVC, the Japanese inventor of
VHS, shared its secret with a raft of other firms." [13] This is
blatantly untrue. While Sony was decidedly behind in the licensing of
its technology, it tried from the very beginning to sign on other
manufacturers to the Beta standard.
2) Betamax was not too expensive.
Consumers buying a new VCR saw only minor pricing differences between
the two formats. Those looking for the latest technology could
apparently find Betamax machines for much less than comparable VHS
machines. (Interestingly, one article [8] that makes this statement
actually compares two machines where the VHS version is $600 dollars
cheaper than the Betamax machine. Possibly the technophile streak that
appears to be the curse of many Betamax afficionadoes influences
buying decisions much more than price.)
3) There was no shortage of prerecorded Beta tapes
This at least was true initially. Only once the Betamax share had
declined well below the VHS share, did prerecorded tape manufacturers
try to decrease their inventories.
4) The Universal and Disney's suit against Sony had no determinable
effect on Sony's standing in the VCR market. However, this issue is
less than clearcut.
Even Sony today agrees that the difference in recording length was the
difference that layed Beta low. [17] The other factor appears to have
been the one factor for which no company can control: pure luck.
References
[1] "The Format War," Video Magazine, April 1988, pp50-54+
[2] "Whatever Happened to Betamax?", Consumers' Research, May 1989, p
28
[3] "The Betamax Blues", New York, September 15, 1980, p 43
[4] "Beta/VHS What's the Difference", Video Today, January 1981, p A8
[5] "VHS Meets Beta", Popular Electronics, August 1981, p 43
[6] "Even Sony Can't Avoid the Price War in VCRs", Business Week,
September 6, 1982, p 33-34
[7] "VHS Hi-Fi: JVC Answers Back", High Fidelity, September 1983, p 65
[8] Stereo Review, April 1984, p 66
[9] "Tape Format Face-Off", High Fidelity, September 1985, p 45
[10] "To the Beta End", Forbes, Dec 16, 1985, p 178
[11] "Format Wars", Rolling Stone, Ja 15, 1987, p 43
[12] "Sony Isn't Mourning the 'Death' of Betamax", Business Week, Ja
25, 1988, p 37
[13] "Goodbye Beta", Time, Ja 25 1988, p 52
[14] "Beta Survival Guide", Video, May 88, pp 45-48
[15] "Video News", Radio Electronics, Sep 88, p 6
[16] "Whatever Happened to Betamax", Consumers' Research, May 89, p 28
[17] "Desperately Seeking Beta", Video, Feb 1994, p 42-44+
[5]http://www.urbanlegends.com/
[6]Copyright Information
References
1. http://www.urbanlegends.com/images/tafkac.gif
2. http://www.urbanlegends.com/
3. http://www.urbanlegends.com/products
4. http://www.urbanlegends.com/images/tafkac.gif
5. http://www.urbanlegends.com/
6. http://www.urbanlegends.com/copyright.html
--
Nathan Raymond
http://www.everythingmac.com
Nicolas Krinis
Steve Sullivan wrote:
>
> I had a doctors appointment yesterday. The doctor said he didnt know much
> about computers, hasnt been on the net yet, but is thinking about getting
> a internet account. I asked him what computer he has, he said a compaq
> (aka a comptrash, from what I hear they are slower than comparable p2's).
>
> I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
> a mac. He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
> He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
> movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
> happen to his computer (of course this is *GUARENTEED* to happen to any
> computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
> computer will be obsolete)
>
> So many pedestrians, so little time.
I agree with you 100%.
I believe this argument to be beaten to death. Beta is dead. The Mac is not.
Case closed, no comparison whatsoever.
This is the kind of uni-dimensionnal thinking that I've come to expect from
most Doctors of medicine. I'm sure he made this assumption with one hand on
the knob of his door, the other hand writing out a prescription for
antibiotics, while he was making his differential diagnosis. Tsi-tsing.....
Nicolas Krinis
none4m...@usit.net
In article <slrn6p4rke...@huitzilo.tezcat.com>, ad...@tezcat.com
(Adam Bailey) wrote:
> In message
<macghod-2506...@sdn-ar-001casbarp024.dialsprint.net>, Steve
Sullivan <mac...@concentric.net> wrote...
>
> >I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
> >a mac. He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
> >He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
> >movies for it
Snip
> I've always hated that argument, because the VCR is nothing like the
> computer.
>
> First, what if beta players had been able to read VHS tapes and beta
> tapes? Would that have made a difference?
>
> Second, the whole point of video is selection. People rarely go out for
> just an action movie, they want *an* action movie. A particular title.
> Software doesn't work that way. Most people just want any word processor,
> any email package, etc. The average person will stick with a handful of
> programs and never switch. Selection isn't as important to the computer
> world.
>
> With video, major titles were not being released on beta. With the Mac,
> the vast majority of major titles are. The rest is pretty meaningless.
>
>
When I purchased my first VCR years ago there was an equal selection of
movies availble for either Beta or VHS.
What I feel helped kill the Beta format is that one of the first questions
asked by the salesman was which format your friends and or family had,for
the purpose of swapping movies with them.
Most people seen the longer recording time with VHS as an advantage,I did not
.
Beta Vcrs where much easier on the tapes due to the fact that the tape
wasnt being threaded back and forth through the tape path everytime you
hit rewind or fast foreward,also the Betas had slighty better picture
quality due to the way the tape wrapped around the head drum.
And as far as I know the best video format availble now: Betacam, has
nothing to do with the old beta format,even though some in this thread
seem to be suggesting its the same.
MacOS/NeXtStep/and if I had $$$I'd be an Openstep User too :)
John Savard
>In message <macghod-2506...@sdn-ar-001casbarp024.dialsprint.net>, Steve Sullivan <mac...@concentric.net> wrote...
>>I told him if he is a newby, he probably would of been better served with
>>a mac. He then made the assertation which is the subject of this post.
>>He said he bought a beta, and it became obsolete and he couldnt buy any
>>movies for it (everything is now in vhs), and he doesnt want that to
>>happen to his computer (of course this is *GUARENTEED* to happen to any
>>computer you buy, pc or mac. Computers advance so quickly eventually ANY
>>computer will be obsolete)
>I've always hated that argument, because the VCR is nothing like the
>computer.
What if he had said that
he bought an Atari ST, and now he can't get any software for it
or
he bought an Amiga, and now he can't get any software for it
and he didn't want it to happen again, so he wasn't buying a Mac?
Sure, computers get obsolete quickly - but that's no reason for one
to go courting having it happen any quicker...
John Savard
http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html