On Fri, 26 May 2000, Anton Graham wrote:
> Submitted 26-May-00 by Hoyt:
>
> | Fun to MS bash, but the reality is that MS is the competition and
> | the poorer product has been known to win and the other die out (VHS
> | vs. Beta?).
>
> In that particular case, the superior technology was far more
> expensive for the end-user. Additionally, to put it in software
> terms, the ``Operating System'' (tape format) had to be licensed from
> Sony. This increased costs for ``developers'' (movie studios), who
> chose to use the more freely available VHS.
Also, it's been quite a few years, but if I recall correctly, beta couldn't
get as much on a tape as VHS. People love to pull this example out and
parade it around, but the simple fact of the matter is, although beta was
superior to VHS in some ways, VHS was superior to beta in some ways too.
And with all due respect to sour beta-heads, for those features that were
truly important to consumers, VHS *was* the superior technology. Get over
it...
