Hi-Def Format War Appears Inevitable.

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by One-Shot Scot, Jan 4, 2005.

  1. Falling DVD revenue and greed and possible dead ends -- oh my!

    First, we had:

    Betamax vs. VHS

    SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc

    Here we go again with:

    Blu-ray vs. HD DVD

    And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.

    *** *** ***

    DEC. 30 | The first real shots of the coming high-definition format war
    were fired just as 2004 was coming to a close.

    Paramount Home Entertainment, Universal Studios Home Entertainment and
    Warner Home Video, with siblings New Line Home Entertainment and HBO
    Video, announced in November plans to release in the HD DVD format by
    Christmas 2005. A week later, Buena Vista Home Entertainment joined Sony
    Pictures Home Entertainment in the Blu-ray Disc camp.

    With that, any hope of a united front among unaffiliated studios
    collapsed, and both hardware camps received all the ammunition necessary
    to push ahead with their respective, mutually incompatible high-def
    formats.

    20th Century Fox Home Entertainment remains officially uncommitted, with
    a foot planted in each camp. But it hardly matters which way Fox goes
    except for bragging rights, as the other studios' announcements ensure
    the high-def era will kick off with two incompatible formats, each
    featuring titles not available in the other.

    As recently as 12 months ago, it didn't look like things had to go that
    way. The story of 2004 involves studios' losing their leverage over the
    hardware designers and failing to secure a compromise.

    When Sony began work on Blu-ray, its strategy was to develop and
    establish the format as a high-def recording standard. With an installed
    base built up for recording, the studios would have no choice but to
    follow the market and eventually begin releasing prerecorded Blu-ray
    discs.

    Toshiba and NEC started out with the same idea for their Advanced
    Optical Disc format (later renamed HD DVD), but they quickly shifted to
    a playback-only strategy once it became clear a recordable format would
    take longer to develop and would cost more.

    Afraid of being left in the dust, the Blu-ray camp shifted strategies as
    well. So by the end of 2003, it was a race to see who could get to
    market first with a playback-only format.

    Of course, for a playback-only format to fly, you need something to play
    back, so both sides set about wooing the studios.

    At the beginning of 2004, the studios had just come off a holiday season
    that enjoyed strong year-on-year growth in DVD sales and saw no reason
    to rush into a new format. With time and titles on their side, the
    studios seemed to have the leverage they needed to bring about a single
    format with all the features and capabilities they required.

    By the middle of the year, however, the growth in DVD sales had begun to
    show signs of leveling off. Meanwhile, new release prices had continued
    to fall, putting pressure on studio margins.

    By the fourth quarter, studio execs began openly wondering about how to
    maintain DVD revenue in the face of flattening or even shrinking
    consumer expenditures.

    Suddenly, high-def looked less like a bonus to be negotiated and more
    like a way to restore some growth and profit margin to a flattening
    business.

    Studio timetables for the introduction of high-def movies now have moved
    up from 2007 to 2005/2006. Instead of having time on their side, they
    worried about being left behind.

    After starting the year in the driver's seat, they slid over to the
    passenger side and gave the wheel back to the hardware makers.

    After listening to the respective pitches, studios began lining up
    behind one format or the other. That might help the studios hit their
    revenue targets in 2005, but it could steer them toward a dead end
    further down the road.

    http://www.videobusiness.com/article.asp?articleID=9501&catType=NEWS
     
    One-Shot Scot, Jan 4, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. One-Shot Scot

    TCS Guest

    On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:00:43 -0800, One-Shot Scot <> wrote:
    >Falling DVD revenue and greed and possible dead ends -- oh my!


    >First, we had:


    > Betamax vs. VHS


    > SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc


    >Here we go again with:


    > Blu-ray vs. HD DVD


    >And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.


    Do you own a betamax vcr?

    Trick is to wait a little bit and see who wins then buy.

    I'm not going hidef until a 32" flatscreen tv is under $1000.
     
    TCS, Jan 4, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. TCS wrote:
    > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:00:43 -0800, One-Shot Scot <>
    > wrote:
    >> Falling DVD revenue and greed and possible dead ends -- oh my!

    >
    >> First, we had:

    >
    >> Betamax vs. VHS

    >
    >> SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc

    >
    >> Here we go again with:

    >
    >> Blu-ray vs. HD DVD

    >
    >> And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.

    >
    > Do you own a betamax vcr?
    >

    Unlike Beta vs VHS, the tapes were different sizes, BD and HD DVD disk
    will be the same size.

    > Trick is to wait a little bit and see who wins then buy.
    >

    The real trick is wait until someone make a player the will play BOTH
    formats, I give it under a year before that happens.
     
    Quantum Leaper, Jan 4, 2005
    #3
  4. One-Shot Scot

    TCS Guest

    On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:37:40 GMT, Quantum Leaper <> wrote:
    >TCS wrote:
    >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:00:43 -0800, One-Shot Scot <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> Falling DVD revenue and greed and possible dead ends -- oh my!

    >>
    >>> First, we had:

    >>
    >>> Betamax vs. VHS

    >>
    >>> SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc

    >>
    >>> Here we go again with:

    >>
    >>> Blu-ray vs. HD DVD

    >>
    >>> And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.

    >>
    >> Do you own a betamax vcr?
    >>

    >Unlike Beta vs VHS, the tapes were different sizes, BD and HD DVD disk
    >will be the same size.


    >> Trick is to wait a little bit and see who wins then buy.
    >>

    >The real trick is wait until someone make a player the will play BOTH
    >formats, I give it under a year before that happens.


    It'll be interesting to see if one format dies before dual format
    players arrive. Doing a dual format shouldn't be too terribly difficult,
    just hang two laser assemblies off the same sled.
     
    TCS, Jan 4, 2005
    #4
  5. On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:03:54 -0600, TCS
    <> wrote:

    >It'll be interesting to see if one format dies before dual format
    >players arrive. Doing a dual format shouldn't be too terribly difficult,
    >just hang two laser assemblies off the same sled.


    And program twice the firmware, and pay twice the royalties, and put a
    pretty face on it that satisfies both the tech geeks and the people who
    just want to watch the damn movie.





    _________________________________________
    Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
    More than 120,000 groups
    Unlimited download
    http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
     
    Kimba W. Lion, Jan 4, 2005
    #5
  6. One-Shot Scot

    Wild Coyote Guest

    On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 13:29:14 -0500, Kimba W. Lion
    <kimbawlionATaolDOTcom@127.0.0.1> wrote:

    >On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:03:54 -0600, TCS
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>It'll be interesting to see if one format dies before dual format
    >>players arrive. Doing a dual format shouldn't be too terribly difficult,
    >>just hang two laser assemblies off the same sled.

    >
    >And program twice the firmware, and pay twice the royalties, and put a
    >pretty face on it that satisfies both the tech geeks and the people who
    >just want to watch the damn movie.
    >
    >


    Thank you.

    --
    Still Howlin' at the Moon!

    Wild Coyote
    wild_coyote<AT>whoppermail.com
     
    Wild Coyote, Jan 4, 2005
    #6
  7. >Betamax vs. VHS
    >


    That's a valid comparison.

    > SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc
    >


    Puhleese! That one wasn't even a competition! CED came out in 1981. Guess
    what happened after that. RCA stopped making players in 1984 and stopped
    making discs in 1986. CED only lasted five years in the States, and even less
    than that in Great Britain. In the USA, LD players were being made until the
    late 1990s and disc manufacturing continued on until about the turn of the
    century. LD players also had an appreciable international market, while CED
    wasn't marketed outside of North America and the United Kingdom. Japan never
    saw a CED release (although a few players from Sanyo, Hitachi, and Toshiba were
    made in Japan). Even Beta lasted a lot longer than CED and, unlike Sony, RCA
    ceased as a corporate entity about the same time CED production halted.

    >Here we go again with:
    >
    > Blu-ray vs. HD DVD
    >
    >And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.


    Maybe, or the winner will be standard DVD-Video. Consumers may not be so keen
    on upgrading their players and discs in such short time in DVD's lifespan.
    Perhaps the manufacturers made regular DVD too good... Then you also have
    alternate high res possibilities, such as HD streaming internet video (which I
    don't think will fly, but it's possible and is, therefore, a factor).

    So, enough sensationalism about the format war. I'm guessing it won't happen
    this time around because not enough people will be willing to upgrade. But who
    knows. The point is, however, is that it has not happened yet so we should
    hold back on the speculations until then. - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 17, 2005
    #7
  8. >Unlike Beta vs VHS, the tapes were different sizes, BD and HD DVD disk
    >will be the same size.


    For Beta and VHS, the **cassettes** were different sizes. The tape size, on
    the other hand, were both 1/2 inch, although both formats dealt with the tape
    differently. Beta used U-loading which was originally used in Sony's U-Matic
    system, while VHS used M-loading that Sony developed but ended up selling to
    JVC (which was a big mistake). - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 17, 2005
    #8
  9. On 17 Jan 2005 13:50:26 GMT, (LASERandDVDfan)
    wrote:

    >>Betamax vs. VHS
    >>

    >
    >That's a valid comparison.
    >
    >> SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc
    >>

    >
    >Puhleese! That one wasn't even a competition! CED came out in 1981. Guess
    >what happened after that. RCA stopped making players in 1984 and stopped
    >making discs in 1986. CED only lasted five years in the States, and even less
    >than that in Great Britain. In the USA, LD players were being made until the
    >late 1990s and disc manufacturing continued on until about the turn of the
    >century. LD players also had an appreciable international market, while CED
    >wasn't marketed outside of North America and the United Kingdom. Japan never
    >saw a CED release (although a few players from Sanyo, Hitachi, and Toshiba were
    >made in Japan). Even Beta lasted a lot longer than CED and, unlike Sony, RCA
    >ceased as a corporate entity about the same time CED production halted.


    Mutch to the detriment of consumers, the RCA name was picked up by
    Thomson, who produce the worst electronic junk in the history of junk;
    they're even worse that the new boys on the block, PRIMA/ADVENT.


    >
    >>Here we go again with:
    >>
    >> Blu-ray vs. HD DVD
    >>
    >>And the loser will be the consumer, as usual.

    >
    >Maybe, or the winner will be standard DVD-Video. Consumers may not be so keen
    >on upgrading their players and discs in such short time in DVD's lifespan.
    >Perhaps the manufacturers made regular DVD too good... Then you also have
    >alternate high res possibilities, such as HD streaming internet video (which I
    >don't think will fly, but it's possible and is, therefore, a factor).
    >
    >So, enough sensationalism about the format war. I'm guessing it won't happen
    >this time around because not enough people will be willing to upgrade. But who
    >knows. The point is, however, is that it has not happened yet so we should
    >hold back on the speculations until then. - Reinhart
     
    E. Barry Bruyea, Jan 17, 2005
    #9
  10. "LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    >Betamax vs. VHS
    >


    That's a valid comparison.

    > SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc
    >


    <<Puhleese! That one wasn't even a competition! CED came out in 1981.
    Guess what happened after that. RCA stopped making players in 1984 and
    stopped making discs in 1986. CED only lasted five years in the States,
    and even less than that in Great Britain. In the USA, LD players were
    being made until the late 1990s and disc manufacturing continued on
    until about the turn of the century. LD players also had an appreciable
    international market, while CED wasn't marketed outside of North America
    and the United Kingdom. Japan never saw a CED release (although a few
    players from Sanyo, Hitachi, and Toshiba were made in Japan). Even Beta
    lasted a lot longer than CED and, unlike Sony, RCA ceased as a corporate
    entity about the same time CED production halted.>>


    Dead formats that created exclusive titles are detrimental to consumers.
    The RCA SelectaVision format had exclusive titles which were not
    initially available on LaserDisc.

    Even though Circuit City's DIVX proprietary digital disk format lasted
    only 11 months, it produced the following list of exclusive titles, some
    of which came out on DVD only recently.

    When DIVX failed in June of 1999, it had over 152 exclusive titles which
    were not available as Region 1 DVDs:

    8 Heads In A Duffel Bag
    12 Angry Men
    48 Hours
    54
    6th Man, The
    Air Bud: Golden Receiver
    Albino Alligator
    Alice in Wonderland
    Another 48 Hours
    Apartment, The
    Baby Boom
    Bachelor Party
    Bad Girls
    Barton Fink
    Before and After
    Best Men
    Best of the Best: Without Warning
    Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure
    Blackjack
    Bridge At Remagen
    Brothers McMullen, The
    Brubaker
    Bullets Over Broadway
    Buffalo '66
    Cadillac Man
    Chain Reaction
    Children of the Revolution
    Cocoon
    Commitments, The
    Cool, Dry Place, A
    Courage Under Fire
    Crucible, The
    Dead Man
    Deceiver
    Desperately Seeking Susan
    Dirty Work
    Distinguished Gentleman, The
    Dumbo
    Dunston Checks In
    Dying Young
    Ed Wood
    Edward Scissorhands
    End of Violence, The
    Everyone Says I Love You
    Evidence Of Blood
    Father Of The Bride Part II
    FernGully: The Last Rainforest
    First Kid
    Fled
    Fly, The
    French Kiss
    From Dusk Till Dawn 2
    Gang Related
    Gone Fishin'
    Great White Hype
    Guadalcanal Diary
    High Art
    Hot Shots!
    House Of Yes
    Houseguest
    I Love You Don't Touch Me!
    I'm Gonna Git You Sucka
    It Came From Outer Space
    Jack
    Jackie Brown
    Jumpin' Jack Flash
    Jungle 2 Jungle
    Kiss Or Kill
    Krippendorf's Tribe
    Last Dance
    Last of the Mohicans, The
    Lenny
    Life Less Ordinary, A
    Little City
    Locusts, The
    Longest Day, The
    Love and Death on Long Island
    Madness Of King George
    Marked for Death
    Marnie
    Married To The Mob
    Miami Rhapsody
    Mighty Quinn
    Misfits, The
    Mo' Better Blues
    Monument Ave.
    Mrs. Doubtfire
    Mulholland Falls
    My Cousin Vinny
    Next Stop Wonderland
    Night and the Moment, The
    Nightwatch
    Nixon
    Office Killer
    One Fine Day
    Operation Condor 2: The
    Paperback Romance
    Picture Perfect
    Planet of the Apes
    Point Break
    Preacher's Wife, The
    Price Above Rubies, A
    Prophecy II, The
    Pure Luck
    Rage, The
    Raising Arizona
    Rapid Fire
    Retroactive
    Rocketman
    Romy and Michelle's High School Reunion
    Senseless Shall We Dance?
    She's So Lovely
    Since You've Been Gone
    Six Degrees Of Separation
    Sleeping With the Enemy
    Soldier's Daughter Never Cries, A
    Some Like It Hot
    Spaceballs
    Stargate SG-1
    Stealing Beauty
    Sudden Death
    Summer Fling
    That Thing You Do!
    This World, Then The Fireworks
    Three Musketeers, The
    Throw Momma From The Train
    Topaz
    Truce, The
    Truth About Cats and Dogs, The
    Turner & Hooch
    TwentyFourSeven
    Two For The Road
    Ulee's Gold
    Up Close & Personal
    Verdict, The
    Walk In The Clouds, A
    Walking And Talking
    Wall Street
    War Of The Roses, The
    Washington Square
    Welcome To Sarajevo
    Who Framed Roger Rabbit
    Wide Awake
    Working Girl
    World Of Henry Orient, The
    Young Frankenstien
     
    One-Shot Scot, Jan 18, 2005
    #10
  11. One-Shot Scot

    TCS Guest

    On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:43:16 -0800, One-Shot Scot <> wrote:
    >"LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote in message
    >news:...


    >>Betamax vs. VHS
    >>


    >That's a valid comparison.


    >> SelectaVision vs. LaserDisc
    >>


    ><<Puhleese! That one wasn't even a competition! CED came out in 1981.
    >Guess what happened after that. RCA stopped making players in 1984 and


    A CED was only good for was a good laugh. "Let me get this straight: I'm
    supposed to pay $40 for a disk that'll wear out? No thanks; I'd rather
    pay $60 for a disk that'll last forever." CED was a clear example of
    a marketing driven product where little actual market research was ever
    done. Nobody ever thought it was remotely a good idea, but it was
    shoved into stores anyway just to prove it could be done. Kind of reminds
    me of divx disks.
     
    TCS, Jan 18, 2005
    #11
  12. >
    >Dead formats that created exclusive titles are detrimental to consumers.
    >The RCA SelectaVision format had exclusive titles which were not
    >initially available on LaserDisc


    True, although there weren't too many exclusives on CED that were worthwhile,
    IMO. There are some that were, but most, well. Jane Fonda's Workout, anyone?
    (although even that saw a videotape release). - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 18, 2005
    #12
  13. >A CED was only good for was a good laugh. "Let me get this straight: I'm
    >supposed to pay $40 for a disk that'll wear out? No thanks; I'd rather
    >pay $60 for a disk that'll last forever." CED was a clear example of
    >a marketing driven product where little actual market research was ever
    >done. Nobody ever thought it was remotely a good idea, but it was
    >shoved into stores anyway just to prove it could be done. Kind of reminds
    >me of divx disks.
    >


    Well, the one thing I can say about CED was that it was a technology that
    worked and didn't have as many problems in the beginning that LaserDisc had
    when it debuted in 1978.

    As for market research, it was done, and done pretty well. Except the
    marketing study was done in the late 1970s. Of course, a lot of things in the
    70s changed when the 80s came along.

    Hilariously enough, CED was more successful than Divx! - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 18, 2005
    #13
  14. "TCS" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:43:16 -0800, One-Shot Scot <>

    wrote:
    > >"LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote in message


    ><<Puhleese! That one wasn't even a competition! CED came out in 1981.
    >Guess what happened after that. RCA stopped making players in 1984 and


    <<A CED was only good for was a good laugh. "Let me get this straight:
    I'm supposed to pay $40 for a disk that'll wear out? No thanks; I'd
    rather pay $60 for a disk that'll last forever." CED was a clear
    example of a marketing driven product where little actual market
    research was ever done. Nobody ever thought it was remotely a good
    idea, but it was shoved into stores anyway just to prove it could be
    done. Kind of reminds me of divx disks.>>


    Shoved into stores is right.

    Back when RCA launched the SelectaVision format, there were still quite
    a few RCA appliance stores remaining. Some of these store owners
    actually thought that SelectaVision would really take off and they
    stocked up on SelectaVision players, repair parts and discs. Some of
    them also started to rent SelectaVision discs and players.

    There were a few RCA appliance store owners who lost a lot of money on
    this half-baked home video idea.

    Did RCA learn from this disastrous experience? Certainly not. RCA (which
    had become Thompson) was a major player in the DIVX format and they
    manufactured thousands and thousands of RCA and Proscan players. When
    DIVX failed, RCA was stuck with warehouses full of these players. Most
    were later DIVX-disabled and sold at a huge loss.
     
    One-Shot Scot, Jan 19, 2005
    #14
  15. >Did RCA learn from this disastrous experience? Certainly not. RCA (which
    >had become Thompson) was a major player in the DIVX format and they
    >manufactured thousands and thousands of RCA and Proscan players.


    To be fair, RCA today is only RCA in name. RCA Corporation no longer exists,
    so they couldn't have been responsible for making a lot of Divx players in
    defiance to past experience. It would be Thomson, as you've said. Thomson
    couldn't have possibly learned of the mistake that was made by RCA in regards
    to CED since they never made it so that's kind of an unfair comparison.

    And, to be fair for RCA's sake in regards to CED, they did spend considerable
    amounts of time and money developing CED. CED was an idea formed in the late
    1950s, with planning taking place in the late 1960s and developed throughout
    the 1970s. To tuck tail and run at such a late time would have meant a loss of
    an enormous amount of money in what they invested, so they simply went ahead
    with the release to at least try to recoup their losses (if they felt that
    their format was a loss to begin with which I'm willing to bet they never did
    with ridiculously unwavering optimism).

    Of course, it was also RCA's mistake of not considering the use of laser
    optical scanning. They apparently originally did, but ultimately went with a
    "traditional" method using a stylus because it was unusual to find a laser in a
    consumer appliance (which also may have been the reason why RCA abandoned
    holotape).

    Plus, you also had to contend with the revoloving door management at RCA.
    During CED's development in the 1970s, there were relativelty constant changes
    in the executive structure, including changes in who was hired for the CEO
    position. One of CED's biggest opponents was Edgar Griffiths, who took over as
    president of RCA Corporation in the later part of the 1970s and was adamantly
    opposed to CED, which may have also helped to allow the format to be released
    late (although truthfully, I'm glad that happened. I prefer LD over CED, so
    who knows what would have happened if CED's development and release was
    expedited sooner if the leadership decided to push it with full support).
    Anyways, it was a wonder that RCA lasted until 1986 with all that crap going
    on! Anyways, even if RCA never planned on making CED a reality, it probably
    still would've went like a star running out of hydrogen because of the attitude
    and ethics of its fluctuating leadership.

    >When
    >DIVX failed, RCA was stuck with warehouses full of these players. Most
    >were later DIVX-disabled and sold at a huge loss.
    >
    >


    Well, I'm hoping that Thomson goes out. If they keep making mistakes like this,
    maybe that will happen.

    I heard a rumor that JVC is interested in acquiring RCA. Now that's what I
    want to see! Hopefully, if this does happen, it would mean that we'll see
    decent electronics with the RCA brand again (and they could legally use the
    Nipper logo as it's owned by JVC).

    Although, I'm still biased towards Sony (Pioneer for LD players). - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 19, 2005
    #15
  16. "LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Did RCA learn from this disastrous experience? Certainly not. RCA

    (which
    > >had become Thompson) was a major player in the DIVX format and they
    > >manufactured thousands and thousands of RCA and Proscan players.

    >
    > To be fair, RCA today is only RCA in name.


    <<SelectaVision history snipped.>>


    Thanks for the information. Here is a site that you may not have seen:

    http://www.cedmagic.com/selectavision.html

    Of particular interest is the extensive SelectaVision VaporWare List.
     
    One-Shot Scot, Jan 19, 2005
    #16
  17. One-Shot Scot

    poldy Guest

    In article <>,
    (LASERandDVDfan) wrote:

    > I heard a rumor that JVC is interested in acquiring RCA. Now that's what I
    > want to see! Hopefully, if this does happen, it would mean that we'll see
    > decent electronics with the RCA brand again (and they could legally use the
    > Nipper logo as it's owned by JVC).


    Thomson of France owns RCA.

    Thomson may be producing HD-DVD players. May be a repeat of RCA's
    experience with CED.
     
    poldy, Jan 20, 2005
    #17
  18. On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:33:22 -0800, poldy <> wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > (LASERandDVDfan) wrote:
    >
    >> I heard a rumor that JVC is interested in acquiring RCA. Now that's what I
    >> want to see! Hopefully, if this does happen, it would mean that we'll see
    >> decent electronics with the RCA brand again (and they could legally use the
    >> Nipper logo as it's owned by JVC).

    >
    >Thomson of France owns RCA.
    >
    >Thomson may be producing HD-DVD players. May be a repeat of RCA's
    >experience with CED.



    Thomson: The only company in the world to produce BRAND NEW JUNK!
     
    E. Barry Bruyea, Jan 20, 2005
    #18
  19. One-Shot Scot <> wrote:

    > Back when RCA launched the SelectaVision format, there were still quite
    > a few RCA appliance stores remaining. Some of these store owners
    > actually thought that SelectaVision would really take off and they
    > stocked up on SelectaVision players, repair parts and discs. Some of
    > them also started to rent SelectaVision discs and players.


    Some people thought that consumers would go for anything cheap, which
    the SelectaVision players were, relatively. But once they got a look at
    the picture quality from discs that had been played a few times, they
    correctly figured that they might as well stick with VHS.
     
    Neill Massello, Jan 20, 2005
    #19
  20. LASERandDVDfan <> wrote:

    > Of course, it was also RCA's mistake of not considering the use of laser
    > optical scanning. They apparently originally did, but ultimately went
    > with a "traditional" method using a stylus because it was unusual to find
    > a laser in a consumer appliance (which also may have been the reason why
    > RCA abandoned holotape).


    Lasers were *expensive* back then. The solid-state lasers in the first
    CD players accounted for roughly half of the $500 price tag.
     
    Neill Massello, Jan 20, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Goldfinger
    Replies:
    141
    Views:
    3,589
    DarkMatter
    Jul 19, 2003
  2. LASERandDVDfan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    748
    LASERandDVDfan
    Jun 28, 2003
  3. Ablang
    Replies:
    50
    Views:
    2,445
    Telstar
    Nov 4, 2007
  4. Charlie Russel-MVP

    Inevitable Consequences

    Charlie Russel-MVP, Sep 30, 2010, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    995
    John Turco
    Oct 31, 2010
  5. Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤

    The War Criminal about to Start another War

    Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤, Nov 26, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    1,124
    Bucky Breeder
    Nov 30, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page