Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by MBCook 72 days ago
VHS was not worse is better. It’s better is better.
2 comments
kn0where 72 days ago
Specifically, VHS had both longer recording times and cheaper VCRs (due to Matsushita’s liberal licensing) than Betamax did. Beta only had slightly better picture quality if you were willing to sacrifice recording length per tape. Most Betamax users adopted the βII format which lowered picture quality to VHS levels in order to squeeze more recording time onto the tape. At that point Betamax’s only advantage was a slightly more compact cassette.

Also to correct another common myth, porn was widely available on both formats and was not the cause of VHS’s success over Betamax.

link
toomuchtodo 72 days ago
Betamax was arguably better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videotape_format_war

link
SoftTalker 72 days ago
Not in ways that the market cared about.
link
mbreese 72 days ago
Arguably better quality, but at the cost of being shorter. In the great trade off of time, size, and quality, I think VHS chose a better combination.
link
a96 72 days ago
Importantly, it was so short that it was inadequate. Go beats no go every time.
link
rapnie 72 days ago
It depends which definition of "better" you use. VHS won the adoption race, so it was better there. While Betamax may have been technologically superior, in hindsight we can say it apparently failed to address other key aspects of the technology adoption lifecycle.
link
MBCook 72 days ago
Who cares? It couldn’t hold a movie on one tape. Thats what the market ended up selecting for. As soon as renting movies took off Beta lost.

When they compromised quality to get there, they were just more expensive.

And later S-VHS improved quality anyway.

link