Slashdot Mirror


Sony Discontinues the Walkman

Ponca City writes "Crunchgear reports that after selling 200,020,000 units worldwide since its inception over thirty years ago, Sony has announced that it is pulling the plug on the manufacture and sales of the Walkman, the world's first portable (mass-produced) stereo. Magnetic cassette technology had been around since 1963, when Philips first created it for use by secretaries and journalists, but on July 1, 1979, Sony Corp. introduced the Sony Walkman TPS-L2, a 14 ounce, blue-and-silver, portable cassette player with chunky buttons, headphones, a leather case, and a second earphone jack so that two people could listen in at once. The Walkman was originally introduced in the US as the 'Sound-About' and in the UK as the 'Stowaway,' but coming up with new, uncopyrighted names in every country it was marketed in proved costly so Sony eventually decided on 'Walkman' as a play on the Sony Pressman, a mono cassette recorder the first Walkman prototype was based on. The popularity of Sony's device — and those by brands like Aiwa, Panasonic and Toshiba who followed in Sony's lead — helped the cassette tape outsell vinyl records for the first time in 1983 as Sony continued to roll out variations on its theme with over 300 different Walkman models, adding such innovations as AM/FM receivers, bass boost, and auto-reverse on later models and even producing a solar-powered Walkman, water-resistant Sport Walkman, and Walkmen with two cassette drives." For now, at least, the Walkman brand lives on for some of Sony's media players and phones.

250 comments

  1. Didn't know they still made it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, missed my chance.

    1. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You probably still have a chance, since they just announced they are discontinuing it... I doubt this will increase demand. You may have troubles finding a store that still carries them new, however, chances are you could find an old one on eBay if you looked hard.. they were that popular that there are probably many old ones whose owners don't want them anymore, and hope to sell to collectors/hoarders of odds and ends.

    2. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      You probably still have a chance, since they just announced they are discontinuing it... I doubt this will increase demand.
      You may have troubles finding a store that still carries them new, however, chances are you could find an old one on eBay if you looked hard.. they were that popular that there are probably many old ones whose owners don't want them anymore, and hope to sell to collectors/hoarders of odds and ends.

      I wonder what's more difficult - finding a new Walkman, or finding music on cassette to listen to on that Walkman?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by camperdave · · Score: 1

      I wonder what's more difficult - finding a new Walkman, or finding music on cassette to listen to on that Walkman?

      You can always put music onto a cassette. Never hear the term "Mix Tape"?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      There are a bunch of audio books you can still get on cassette tape, the library also seems to have a whole lot of this. It will be mostly old content.

      To listen to new music, you may have to implement the 1990s version of "sync your iPod". Buy CDs, and use a cassette recorder to record the music to blank cassette tapes which are still available

      Sounds like a pain... iPod sync is a lot faster and more convenient than copying to cassette.

      Although there is a minor advantage, that once copied to tape, you can switch between tapes almost instantly, this is more than made up for by how much music an iPod can hold at a time, however.

    5. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can always put music onto a cassette. Never hear the term "Mix Tape"?

      No, no, *please* don't do that! As the campaign from the Walkman's glory days informed us....

      Home Taping is Killing Music... and it's Illegal.

      I still feel guilty about how copying some of my parents' LPs had caused the end of the music industry by 1988. ;'-(

      *cough*

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Actually I wouldn't even say switching tapes is an advantage anymore, as many $30-$50 Sandisk players now had Micro-SD slots which let you switch cards of up to 8Gb, so you can not only switch "tapes" you can have 8Gb genre cards and the cards plus player take up less than a pack of cigarettes, while the Walkman was always a fat bastard by comparison.

      What killed the Walkman was Sony Entertainment and Sony's love for proprietary formats and DRM. While everyone else jumped on MP3 as soon as they saw it was the de-facto standard everyone was using, Sony desperately hung onto ATRAC like it was actually something people would use. Why would I bother converting to your funky proprietary format, when others would play the file as is? Hell my 2008 Sony car stereo still has support for ATRAC, not that I'd ever use it.

      It just goes to show that having a consumer entertainment arm and a consumer electronics division under one roof is a BAD idea.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    7. Re:Didn't know they still made it. by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      My Walkman plays MP3s only. It's got a drag-and-drop interface and loads as a mass USB storage device. The sound quality is quite good.

      The only problem I have with it is that you can only create playlists using WMP11, which doesn't run under Wine.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  2. Just imagine... you could put 90 minutes of music! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's like 15-20 of your favorite songs. Take that iPod.

  3. Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hard to believe something that was once the #1 format for music (late 80s and early 90s) is now foreign to anyone college aged or younger.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      The same thing has happened to floppy disks and VHS.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      VHS was an inferior format anyways. BetaMax ftw (unfortunately it lost the format wars).

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    3. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      It might happen faster to iPod... (which itself is widespread only in few places)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by scottrocket · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, they're actually more familiar with old-school vinyl than cassette. Life is strange.

    5. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by couchslug · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It was also the first convenient format for file sharing.

      Reel-to-reel tape decks were "servers" to which vinyl records were ripped. Sneakernet took care of the logistics.

      Now help me find my lawn...

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    6. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And nothing of value was lost. The only good thing about cassettes was compact size, otherwise they pretty much sucked.

      I still have a bunch of (mostly out of print) VHS tapes I've been clinging to. But the shoeboxes of audio cassettes are long gone, no hesitation tossing those.

    7. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

      pfft, wandering minstrels FTW!

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    8. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by BrentH · · Score: 1

      The iPod isn't really a format, the format would be high capacity digital audio player I'd say, colloquially known as MP3-players.

    9. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah BetaMax, yet another another superior proprietary Sony format. I already feel so lucky that BluRay won this format war.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    10. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      And cassette Walkman wasn't the only portable cassette audio player...so? (though it seems its trademark became more universally genericized)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    11. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sneakernet was definitely better than the Internet in some ways. Sure latency sucked, but the bandwidth was amazing. Plus as long as you traded just with friends the likelihood of the BSA finding out about your pirated software was almost nothing.

    12. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hard to believe something that was once the #1 format for music (late 80s and early 90s) is now foreign to anyone college aged or younger.

      The same thing has happened to floppy disks and VHS.

      And good spelling.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    13. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      I still use cassettes and also record new ones (from vinyl records). My reason is that

      1. I have a lot of cassettes already, copying them to CDs or MDs or whatever would take a long time and cost a lot of money (because I would need the CD or MD recorder and a lot of blank media) and would get me no result (a CD is bigger than a cassette anyway).
      2. I have enough tape decks - one in my car, two portables (one bigger, one smaller) and one stationary tape deck at home. I also have two lower quality tape decks that I can use if the quality requirements are not that high and I don't want to wear out my better ones.
      3. Recording to a cassette is easier than with a CR recorder (if you mess up you have to throw the CD-R out, but with a cassette you can try again) and more reliable than using a computer.

      Because of 1. I'll keep a few tape decks working, so 2. will be true. Because of 2. and 3. I'll keep recording music to cassettes.

      In a sense, I'm locked in to cassettes.

      I also record TV shows to VHS tapes.

    14. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are still lots of floppy disks, but at least now we have Viagra to fix it... /Rimshot

      If you have a condition where you can accurately refer to it as a "disk", I think you have more problems than Viagra can fix.

    15. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Informative

      >>>BetaMax ftw

      Myth. VHS and Betamax have almost-identical specs (see below). In fact VHS has one advantage Betamax did not have: It could hold 10.5 hours per tape, while Betamax maxed-out at just 5.5 hours. VHS is the superior standard, and that's why it won.

      VHS Bmax feature
      yes yes Hi-Fi sound?
      250 240 Lines of horizontal resolution (420 for Super VHS)
      3.0 3.0 Luma Bandwidth in megahertz (5.5 for Super VHS)
      0.6 0.6 Chroma Bandwidth
      10+ 5.5 Hours of record time

      Oh and before you mention professional usage, that's BetaCAM not betamax. Completely different format (like Mac vs. PC vs. Amiga floppies). While Betacam was superior to VHS, Betamax was not. It was mostly identical, or inferior (in terms of record time).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    16. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bluray's not owned by Sony (like beta was). Bluray is owned by multiple companies under the umbrella organization called "Bluray Consortium" similar to the DVD consortium.

      BTW vhs was also proprietary. It was owned by JVC. I didn't see that our lives were harmed by that fact?
      And CDs and Cassettes are also proprietary.
      The world did not end when they were dominant.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    17. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Kilrah_il · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hey man, I was talking about other people. Me, I have a hard drive!
      Damn, all those childhood stupid jokes just keep coming back. It's like riding a bicycle. Thanks Slashdot.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    18. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I suspect that there are two phenomena at work, actually seen all over when it comes to deprecation of technology:

      1. Some formats/technologies are inferior even at the time they were made, but justified by the compromises of the time. In this case, analog cassette tape was relatively low-fi(gradually improved, but wow and flutter really sucked), had to be rewound, and was vulnerable to tape-chewing incidents. Even at the time, it was justified against reel-to-reel only by cost and portability(nice thing about tape is, for all its vices, you can always make it better just by making it bigger) and was at best sonically even with vinyl, but again smaller and cheaper. People who are into 'retro-chic' tech are rather less likely to latch onto the compromise tech, unless the good stuff was so wildly expensive that it remains unreachable to them to this day.

      2. The 'futuristic'-'contemporary'-'obsolete'-'retro'-antique' progression: As a technology ages, its appeal changes in a rather nonlinear way. During the 'futuristic' stage, it is lustworthy; but either absurdly expensive or not actually ready for the real world. High mindshare; but zero marketshare. The 'contemporary' phase marks the peak of a technology's marketshare, when it is the basis of the vast majority of whatever systems it is relevant to; but this actually weakens its appeal. People might value what it does; but it is common to the point of banality. 'Obsolete' is the nadir of something's appeal. Marketshare is still quite high, albeit with gradually declining install base; but it is perceived as actively inferior to whatever has become 'contemporary'. It is often still architecturally similar, so it has no exotic appeal; but is worse, slower, uglier, whatever. A wintel from 1995 would qualify. Architecturally, it is nearly identical to one of today, only worse in basically every respect. 'Retro' is a stage that only some technologies every achieve. Here, the technology has become sufficiently alien from whatever is 'contemporary' that its flaws and quirks are seen as charming, rather than directly compared against the present, and any unique advantages it had have rabid fanboys. Things like record players, c64s, anything BeOS(retrocomputing in general, really), are here. 'Antique' is somewhat similar to retro; but applies to technologies so old or esoteric that they have basically fallen out of the market. Only a few hardcore specialists or obscure hobbyists have them, production is either artisanal or nonexistent, and so forth. Edison cylinder machines, difference engines, Thinking Machines systems, and the like qualify.

      Tape is a poor contender on both points. Even during its time of greatest popularity, it was always the poor cousin to something cooler; but either more expensive or less portable. It also seems to have missed out on 'retro'(with the very limited exception of being a useful source for found-sound artists/musicians of various sorts); but still has decades to go before it has a shot at being antique.

    19. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well MP3 is already obsolete. The new dominant format is now AAC on iTunes, and its cousin AAC+SBR aka HE-AAC for net streaming.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    20. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1, Informative

      It was also the first convenient format for file sharing.

      I remember seeing a twin-deck walkman (it opened on each side) so that you could copy tapes on the move, while listening to them.

    21. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      I hate vinyl. Most of my 80s collection is on cassette due to the better sound quality (no skipping, no static, no motor hum in the needle).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    22. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>I'm locked in to cassettes.
      >>>I also record TV shows to VHS tapes.

      My brother! I've found you. ;-) When my Metal tape deck died in 2003, so too did my recording off the FM radio. No great loss. There's really no need anymore, because you can rip any song you want off Youtube and store it on c: or on Googlemail.

      But my Super VHS? Still use it. It creates perfect DVD-quality copies from my DTV converter box, which I can store indefinitely on my bookshelves.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    23. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had hundreds of casettes. I dumped them all in one go when I got broadband internet.

      Seriously, cassettes were used because there weren't any alternatives back then. I sure couldn't afford to buy everything on vinyl, so I copied a lot from friends. And they copied everything I got on vinyl, ofcourse. Other than that, cassettes are a rotten despicable format. Turn over the tapes (auto-reverse eats tapes) every half hour (those longer tapes get eaten anyway) and don't start about sound quality. Yes, with the expensive high-end tapes it was better, but those where, well, expensive.

      So, after I got a fast internet connection I took out my boxes of tapes and downloaded the complete discography of every artist I encountered on the cassette label. Took me about an evening of searching and about a day or two of downloading and fixing the filenames.

      There, done and done. Tapes got dumped, Loads more closetspace, everybody happy.

    24. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Music sound quality on youtube varies from video to video, but you can find a video with good enough sound quality. However, a lot of the music I like can be only found on records and tapes, so I either have to buy the record or borrow it and copy it to tape (depending on which option I find). And the audio quality of a tape is quite good too - Imation TDK SA tapes might not be what they once were, but they are still quite good. There are also higher quality cassettes, but they are more expensive.

      I use regular VHS though. SVHS tapes are a bit too expensive, but since I mainly record music TV shows the video quality is good enough for me and HiFi audio quality on VHS and SVHS is the same.

    25. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by westlake · · Score: 1

      VHS was an inferior format anyways. BetaMax ftw (unfortunately it lost the format wars).

      Betamax was introduced in 1975.

      The color TV with RF input only - essentially every color set built since the introduction of color in 1954 - would have had a resolution no better than about 300 lines.

      The ability to record a movie or a football game on a single cassette was of more immediate value than video enhancements to be seen only on a static Indian Head test pattern.

      VHS manufacturers found a better solution to the drum miniaturization issue. (It involved four heads doing the work of two.) Because it used standard video signals, VHS camcorders could review footage in the camcorder and copy to another VCR for editing. (Two Beta decks and a Betamovie were required for similar functionality, and this still did not allow a videographer to review footage in the field.) This shifted the home movie advantage dramatically away from Beta Betamax

    26. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I've still got a lot of cassettes I recorded, and somewhat original (lots of video game recordings, for one). I can't believe I'm now one of those "old" people with media many people have never seen before.

    27. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Reel-to-reel != cassette. Reel-to-reel is the AEG Magnetophon system and all of its derivatives, where you have two reels that are placed on the machine separately, and you have to thread the tape manually from one reel to the other.

      Reel-to-reel decks were large and costly enough that I don't expect them to have been very popular for vinyl ripping. An 18 cm reel cost as much as an LP, iirc.

      Cassette tape decks were the instruments of the first large-scale music pirates.

    28. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by scottrocket · · Score: 3, Interesting
      "It also seems to have missed out on 'retro'(with the very limited exception of being a useful source for found-sound artists/musicians of various sorts);"

      That just reminded me of this. It seems some indy film makers still enjoy "the look" this cassette camera generates.

    29. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Well, if the music of your favorite artists is available for download - great. In my case, it's usually not.

      Also, I don't care about having to turn the tape over. After all, I have to turn a record over almost twice as frequently. With MP3 I usually have to select each and every song or spend time making a playlist. And TDK SA90 that costs ~1.5EUR when used with Dolby B has great quality.

    30. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      it didn't loose, it was strangled by its parent company

    31. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe me, your favorite artist is also available for download. No matter how obscure, it's there.

      As for making a playlist, I don't bother. I've got a few directory trees with genre (think "mellow background pop", "intense workout trance", "annoy the neighbors deathmetal") and hit shuffleplay.

      But, to be perfectly honest, I lately find myself playing internet radio streams. Having locally stored music seems somewhat old fashioned...

    32. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by JoltinJoe77 · · Score: 1

      I have four young children and almost everything we listen to or watch is stored digitally and instantly available. When they grow up it will be hard for them to imagine having to put anything physical into a unit in order to watch it or listen to it. The main exception is the current generation of game consoles, but I anticipate the next generation of consoles making everything available via download (at least optionally). Heck, with DVR they already struggle to understand if what they want to watch isn't available right this second.

    33. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by EdZ · · Score: 1

      Then there are things like CED (essentially a vinyl record storing video), which manage to skip right from 'futuristic' to 'antique'.

    34. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Myth. VHS and Betamax have almost-identical specs (see below). In fact VHS has one advantage Betamax did not have: It could hold 10.5 hours per tape, while Betamax maxed-out at just 5.5 hours. VHS is the superior standard, and that's why it won.

      WTF? I have a VHS VCR, though I haven't used it for 10 or 15 years.

      The longest readily available tape was the T-120. At the standard settings, it was enough for two hours of video. You could record in Extended play mode for six hours, but the results were horrible, and often quite fatiguing on the eyes. I never used the EP mode, and was even a bit leery of the medium speed setting (4 hrs).

      10.5 hours per tape sounds like a security tape setting. "At 10.15 this morning, a grey blob entered the store, and subsequently pulled out a dark gray blob, and brandished it at the cashier."

    35. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Twin-deck home units were very common for that purpose.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    36. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "I don't expect them to have been very popular for vinyl ripping."

      I must have been hallucinating the many reel-to-reels we used at the time (early 1980s). Standard procedure was buy an album, play it once, then rip what you like. Store vinyl, play reel-to-reel for long listening sessions, and rip to (expendable) cassette for car or Walkman use. Typical processing included Burwen Research boxes for reducing noise on imperfect LPs.

      The home PC replaced a LOT of once-expensive equipment.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    37. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by TheTrueScotsman · · Score: 1

      All you needed was a good turntable and some clean vinyl. Nobody said it was easy, but the gorgeous sound of a Linn Sondek with freshly-cleaned vinyl pisses on anything else (24/96 digital included). And I speak as somebody who's business is digital audio.

    38. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by scottrocket · · Score: 1
      "Believe me, your favorite artist is also available for download. No matter how obscure, it's there."

      "Stuffy's Frozen Parachute Band". I think I will hang onto my no-label, white demo vinyl, it's probably the only one in existence. Maybe someday I'll get around to fixing my old turntable, & create a digital copy - hey you're right! It would be available for download!

    39. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      The music of my favorite artists might be available for download, but I could not find more than a few songs. Even on eMule. The probable reason is that the music was popular in my small country and not in the entire world. Anyone who still has the records and tapes is most likely much older than me and even if they use computers and the internet, they probably don't want to bother with copying the records to the PC and making them available for download ("why me? Everybody else can do it too"). And most of the young people (who would copy it and make a torrent) do not like the music.

      But, to be perfectly honest, I lately find myself playing internet radio streams.

      Radio - internet or FM is nice, but sometimes I just want to listen to music and know what the next song will be and have the same order of songs every time. I do not really understand the attractiveness of the "shuffle" function.

    40. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Abrisene · · Score: 1

      I'm sure someone said the exact same thing with regards to home radio and television at some point in the 60s and 70s.

    41. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      ...CDs which came out of cooperation of only two companies, one of them being Sony (the other Philips; "S" and "P" in S/PDIF, too). Which is also exclusively responsible for the most widespread FDD standard, DAT, Hi8; cooperating on MSX, DVD, miniDV or HDV.

      So many of those horrible Sony formats.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    42. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a fan of hip hop or breakbeat then, huh?
      Mmm, scratching!

    43. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      The longest readily available tape was the T-120.

      I have a stack of VHS tapes sitting behind me now (I am going to transfer some of them to DVD). Most of them are 4 hour tapes, but some of them are 5 hours in length (300 minutes). The 10.5 hours would be using the EP mode to double the length. Maybe they had 15 minutes extra tape to give it the extra 30 minutes to which the GP referred. I've never timed one to see.

      However, when the VHS/Beta wars first started Beta could do 60 minutes while VHS recorded 120 minutes. They both kept improving, but VHS always had the superior length (due to the larger cassette size). I believe that the 300 minute tapes appeared long after Beta was dead and buried. The Beta format had superior picture quality at the start, but that was sacrificed to extend the length of their tapes, so they were pretty even once video recorder sales had skyrocketed.

      The other major factor in the widespread adoption of VHS was that JVC licenced the format to other manufacturers sooner and for less money than Sony. I remember when I first saw a non-Sony branded Beta recorder. I thought at the time that they were way too late to be doing that.

    44. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 1

      I had several T-160s - that works out to 10.6667 hours at EP.

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    45. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      T-120 (2/4/6 hour) and 160 (2:40/5:20/8 hour) tapes were common in the US. Betamax reached tape length parity when Beta II/III speed decks came out along with L750 length (1.5/3/4.5 hour) tapes.

      The primary quality advantage prior to the SuperBeta format extension was how it stored chroma information. Betamax had slightly higher chroma bandwidth then VHS and stored a reference color burst on the tape. The latter helps as the tapes age. I just digitized a nearly 30 year old Betamax home movie last night, and the color was definitely in better shape then the VHS tapes from the same era were. Chroma bleeding is a chronic problem with old VHS tapes.

      Regarding 3rd party licenses, there were a few early ones. My family has never owned a Sony built Betamax. Oddly all our machines were built by Sanyo (Sanyo or Sears branded). My grandfather and later uncle did own an original Sony BetaMovie camcorder (tube, with manual focus and white balance!).

    46. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      (Replying to self) I see now that the half hour difference noted was due to PAL/NTSC differences. See the VHS tape length table. I also see that there is a difference between the definition of the tape speeds (SP/LP/EP) between PAL and NTSC. How confusing!

    47. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Sony always seemed to put a heavy emphasis on miniaturizing home camcorders. One could never figure out why though, since the market didn't really care in the 1980s. The BetaMovie was a technical masterpiece or a hack depending on who you talk to. It used a tiny 1 head high speed recording drum. The rest of the camcorder was pretty primitive though, the view finder was optical and employed a system similar to a SLR camera. This made it tough to judge lighting in a room, a problem when using a camcorder rated for minimum 25 lux.

      Sony abandoned the format for Video8 and later Hi-8. Its only downside was that you had to use the camcorder to play back the footage. JVC's VHS-C had the portability and playback advantage, but the tapes were short and tended to to have threading and jamming issues when played back in standard VHS VCRs with that adapter thingie (oddly enough JVC VCRs were the worst for jamming VHS-C tapes).

    48. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Tape lasted a lot longer then it should have because of car stereos. CD players were an expensive OEM option until the mid-90s. Even then, OEM car stereos came with a tape deck standard until just a few years ago. Most of them are used for those line-in adapters now, a much nicer solution then FM modulation if you don't have a dedicated line in.

    49. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it didn't loose, it was strangled by its parent company

      How can something be strangled if it's loose?

    50. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Not a fan of hip hop or breakbeat then, huh? Mmm, scratching!

      This right here is how vinyl survived and reminded popular. DJing with anything else wasn't practical until CD based mixers became available. That and the jukebox infrastructure in countless diners. Yes, there are STILL 45rpm jukeboxes in operation. Most popular singles are available on 45rpm if you look hard enough.

    51. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      But my Super VHS? Still use it. It creates perfect DVD-quality copies from my DTV converter box, which I can store indefinitely on my bookshelves.

      More like until the VCR dies. Tape doesn't last forever either, particularly if it isn't stored correctly. You might want to check out computer based DVRs, its a lot easier to work with... plus its random access.

    52. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by znerk · · Score: 1

      But my Super VHS? Still use it. It creates perfect DVD-quality copies from my DTV converter box, which I can store indefinitely on my bookshelves.

      until the iron filings on the plastic tape inside become damaged due to magnetic and/or electrical fields...
      or the tape stretches, or melts...

      Admittedly, "burned" CDs can become unreadable after a few years, too, due to the ink fading...

      It seems no storage medium is perfect; I prefer a storage medium that won't be degraded simply by reading the data stored on it.

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    53. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Informative

      The longest readily available tape was the T-120. [..] 10.5 hours per tape sounds like a security tape setting. "At 10.15 this morning, a grey blob entered the store, and subsequently pulled out a dark gray blob, and brandished it at the cashier."

      Well, you'd be surprised; I got a watchable 12 hours from my most recent (circa 2004) VHS recorder.

      To be fair, this was a PAL model, and PAL tapes ran slower for some reason (*). However, by the early-90s, E-180 and E-240 tapes (**) were already widely available and the most common.

      So I had a few E-240 tapes and used them on EP (one-third speed) which was actually quite watchable on a portable set; slightly inferior to standard play speed, but not as much as you'd expect. (***) 'Course even then I knew that I'd end up with a DVR sooner rather than later, so it was a bit late to get a machine with that nice perk.

      (*) Don't know why, as AFAICT the total number of lines per second works out almost identical.
      (**) *Blank* tapes are identical and interchangeable between NTSC and PAL, but the different speed- and hence running time- means it makes more sense to have different systems, e.g. an E-180 tape would be a T-129 on an NTSC machine.
      (***) Though that model had Hi-Fi stereo, which didn't suffer as much due to the decrease in speed. Mono non-HiFi models had linearly-recorded sound which was signficantly degraded even at LP (half-speed) because the linear speed of the tape was *very* slow.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    54. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Well, only confusing given that PAL runs slower than NTSC to start with. Otherwise, it appears that SP = standard speed, LP = half standard speed, EP = one third standard speed.

      EP wasn't common on PAL models, possibly because they ran slower to begin with (despite the fact the total number of lines per second is almost identical to NTSC... huh?). But I did have a late model that included it.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    55. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1

      It was also the first convenient format for file sharing.

      I remember seeing a twin-deck walkman (it opened on each side) so that you could copy tapes on the move, while listening to them.

      To whoever modded me Troll here's a link to it.

    56. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      To say one is more familiar with vinyl because of some retro appeal is missing the true point. You want to see why the young ones today know what vinyl is you need only walk into a nightclub. The reason most popular albums are released on vinyl is to satisfy two people, audio enthusiasts and their $10000 turntables, and ravers scratching away on their Technics 1200 series. The "retro" following vinyl has would never stand up on it's own as a business that can afford to create new and wonderful pressings. Second hand yes, but new ... barely.

    57. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if you are trying to be funny or are just an idiot. For floppy it is spelled "disk" not "disc."

    58. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

      With a good turntable & needle, Vinyl will blow most 4-track compact cassettes out of the water. TDK SA and SA-X Type ][ tapes will be *very* good though, and MA-GX type IV tapes are even better.

      My first *real* setup was a late '70s high-end DUAL with a Shure V15 type IV MicroRidge cartridge (bought in 1988). No hum that I could hear, minimal static, and since I take care of my vinyls, no skipping.

      I still have that cartridge, but with a standard Midrange belt-driven turntable for the moment, waiting for a deal on a Transcriptor Skeleton turntable (http://www.the-adam.com/adam/loci-4tn/vestigal.htm) like one of my friends is currently using on a really good (lower high-end) system (Atoll class-A pre-amp, multiple Atoll class-A amps and Pierre-Etienne Leon speakers). Looks really nice too. I'm pretty sure I could hear sounds I've never heard on my setup before :)

      Even a Technics SL-1200 would be a really good choice, but not as nice looking as the Transcriptor :)

      I'd rather lose some dynamic range than listening to overdriven,all meters in the red,distorted & clipping CD anytime.

      Besides, Vinyl on an all analog tube amp has a warm sound no modern system can match (IMHO)...

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    59. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by ickleberry · · Score: 1

      Still Sony is the head poncho when it comes to any developments in the blu-ray format, they already have an extra finger in the pie because Sony are also content producers.

      Its like saying Android isn't owned by Google

    60. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh...I hate to break the news to ya old pal, but I've NEVER actually seen those formats on ANY machines except those that had iPods, and they are a small niche of the overall market. Much more folks got Sandisk and other "knock off" MP3 players and the only other format I've seen in any numbers is WMA, and that is simply because of XP users not knowing that their WMP defaults to WMA.

      So while I'm sure those formats are popular for Mac users and iPod owners, combined they are still a small part of the overall market. Oh and looking at the occasional P2P app the dominant formats are still 192-320k MP3, although FLAC is starting to become popular on certain releases, with Europe using APE for some reason.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    61. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>The longest readily available tape was the T-120...in Extended play mode for six hours

      You say you haven't used VHS in 15 years. Okay fair enough. Fifteen years ago BASF was selling "9 hour tapes" in Kmart. That's T-180. So your claim is fallacious or at least misinformed. Later-on I discovered T-210 which is 3x210 == 10.5 hours, but I admit it I had to buy it from amazon.com.

      There's also a T-240 that I acquired direct from JVC. It holds 12 hours on VHS - longest tape ever made.
      .

      >>>but the results were horrible

      Yes the SLP mode is blurry, but good enough for a football game, or if you need to go to dinner with your wife and want to record the evening primetime dramas. Eventually I upgraded to Super VHS which really does equal DVD quality at the standard SP setting, and sightly less quality in extended SLP mode.

      Betamax also had three different speeds, but it could only record 5.5 hours. Not even long enough to record Sci-Fi Channel's daily marathon.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    62. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Informative

      The reason is 50 Hz frame rate for PAL and 60 Hz for NTSC.

      The 50 Hz frame rate (half frames actually which leads to 25 full frames per second) is also the reason why cinema movies (which use 24 fps) are sped up on PAL video.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    63. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>>Betamax had slightly higher chroma bandwidth then VHS and stored a reference color burst on the tape.

      That's BetaCAM not betamax. VHS and Betamax both used the same "color under" system, with just 0.6 MHz bandwidth. i.e. No difference. In fact some have claimed JVC simply stole a Betamax deck and copied its design, since they are near identical, but nobody's been able to prove it.

      Another disadvantage Betamax had was the tape-handling system. In made rewinding and fast-forwarding a tedious process, and also prevented Sony from releasing a Betamax camcorder that could do instant playback (like VHS and VHS-C could do).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    64. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      A BRAND-NEW record does have some amazing high frequencies, but after a couple plays the record wears and they disappear, and it sounds little better than a staticy FM radio (50-15,000 hertz). Then the CD or Cassette (20-22,000 hertz) sounds better.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    65. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      The reason is 50 Hz frame rate for PAL and 60 Hz for NTSC.

      Yes, I'm aware of the different frame rates, but you forgot also that PAL has more lines than NTSC. I was doing the following rough calculation:-

      50 fields/sec x 625 lines x 0.5 = 15,625 lines/sec (PAL)
      60 fields/sec x 525 lines x 0.5 = 15,750 lines/sec (NTSC)

      Negligible difference... so anyone know why PAL VHS tapes ran significantly slower (and longer)?

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    66. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Not a fan of hip hop or breakbeat then, huh?

      Yes but I still don't need the turntable. Here's one. I picked it because most people will recognize the tune (MC Hammer). Watch the guys in the background: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVWFiptGNY

      "And I send it to (scratch) LL (scratch) Or DJ (scratch) Ron."
      "All this scratchin' is makin' me itch."

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    67. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by epo001 · · Score: 1

      This is simply not the case, I saw both at the time on many occasions and VHS had a markedly inferior picture to Betamax. VHS was, and remains, an inferior format in every practical sense.

      But what did put the nail into the coffin of Betamax were Sony's licensing terms and the video rental industry. VHS was easier for other manufacturers to produce and although I can remember e.g. Virgin video rental off Oxford St (in London) stocking rental tapes in both formats this was obviously a major pain and the major rental companies wished to standardise, pushing others along with them. At some point in the 80's there was a major selloff of pre-recorded Betamax tapes, great for those of use with Betamax machines as we could pick up boxes of them for next to nothing.

    68. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are kidding right? LP's fidelity is vastly superior to cassette. Hell, an LP on a quality system is vastly superior to CD!

    69. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>More like until the VCR dies.

      Yeah well, good thing I have 6 of them then. :-) Most VCRs will last 10-15 years so basically I'm set for life, unless the VCRs start rotting (not likely). I do have a Panasonic ReplayTV DVR but the quality isn't as good as Super VHS. And hooking-up my computer is more hassle than I want to deal with.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    70. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still Sony is the head poncho ...

      Sorry for OT, but is "poncho" there intentional?

    71. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      despite the fact the total number of lines per second is almost identical to NTSC... huh?

      The PAL standard is defined as 25 fps, while NTSC was defined as 29.xx fps (forget exactly what). No idea why NTSC was defined as such an odd number - the PAL rate is close enough as makes no difference to the film standard of 24 fps.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    72. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I moved away from my parents house, I no longer had access to a decent reel recorder, the next best thing was a Sony Hi-Fi VHS that had manual controls for audio recording levels. Being that I still made a copy of my original recording either from a CD or album source, that VCR was capable of copies that had the quality very close and in some ways better than I Akai reel deck I had been using. The great thing was the VCR tapes under $2 a piece and I could fit 2 hours on them in SP and 6 hours in EP with only a slight quality difference. Hi-Fi audio heads write across the tape similar to how the video was so the effective size or speed of the tape is much higher, if the head alignment was right and tracked correctly (which that Sony did), the quality was great.

      Once the CD burner arrived, all of that went away....

    73. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean 'head honcho'.

    74. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Sony always seemed to put a heavy emphasis on miniaturizing home camcorders. One could never figure out why though, since the market didn't really care in the 1980s.

      That's simple - the smaller it is, the more likely it is to be adopted by the mass market. No one wants to lug around a big camera when a smaller one can do the job well enough at half the size. Even if you claim the market didn't care during the 80s, were it not for the efforts then you would be 10 years behind in miniaturisation, most likely.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    75. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      VHS was actually royalty free from pretty early on, effectively an open standard. Te same applies to compact cassettes.

    76. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Given that reasonably high resolution rotary encoders suitable for connection to computers have been cheap for ages(your mouse had two, back in the bad days, and the technology has only gotten better and cheaper since) and given that the computational power and memory capacity needed to emulate any turntable effect based on input from such encoder peripherals have also been cheap and accessible for a while, I stand by my "retro" theory of vinyl.

      Yes, much of the contemporary popularity of vinyl is driven by the fact that you can manipulate playback quite precisely by hand; but it is culture, rather than technology, preventing rotary encoder peripherals and damage-proof software from eating that market alive.

    77. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Given the technical specs that seems rather improbable. Analog systems are also highly device-dependent, so it's possible you were viewing different quality magnetic tape or machines.

    78. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Sanyo Beta decks worked like VHS decks, they threaded the tape back into the cassette every time you pressed stop. They also used a similar "M" style loading system to cut down on costs as opposed to the "C" loading system Sony adopted from U-Matic. Ironically, many newer (S)VHS VCRs don't thread the tape back into the machine when rewinding or fast forwarding. My JVC certainly doesn't because its counter relays on the sync track being present and its needed to use the indexing function. Chroma bandwidth of Betamax was 688khz vs. 629khz on VHS. (source: http://www.videointerchange.com/video-history.htm#BetaMax )

      Finally, I come from a dual format household, there was no VHS vs. Betamax war. Heck, our Beta machine got a lot of use dubbing Macrovision protected VHS tapes ;).

    79. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>SVHS tapes are a bit too expensive

      You can record SVHS-ET on standard VHS tape, and if you buy quality (like TDK) you won't see any difference from the "real" SVHS tapes.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    80. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      The PAL VHS was developed later, so JVC sacrificed horizontal resolution in order to gain ~1.5 times longer record time (as compared to the original Japan/US spec). Also Pal VHS only has two recording speeds (regular and 1/2), versus three for american or Japanese VCRs (1, 1/2, 1/3).

      BTW I'm glad ye all like my Wikipedia VHS time chart. I made it. :-)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    81. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      But reversing the argument what's the benefit? The CD was portable, more durable, and provided real benefits to the immediate home user. There is little of that to the DJ who relies on his ability to scratch his music collection to make money. For many I'm sure they'd gladly switch over to CD based "turntables" which really have only started getting popular in last 10 years, whereas CD in the home has been on it's steady rise for ... 20-25? years. Many have a lot of invested interest in vinyl though and at $15 per disc it doesn't come cheap to replace it.

      Culture enjoying something does not directly relate to "retro" chic. As a culture we don't seem to care much for Blu-ray right now either, and that's not a technological limitation. Sure retro appeal has a part of it, but I think it's more of a ... commercial investment delay as such. Give it 10 years I may agree with you, but right now the CD mixing table is still on its rise.

    82. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

      The market considered capacity more important than bandwidth.
      Since VHS PAL came later JVC was able to tweak the spec to optimize it for what the "market wanted".

      VHS PAL uses lower bandwidth and thus lower speed compared to VHS NTSC.

      By this time the Beta vs. VHS war was already won so JVC hedged the spec in favor of capacity over quality thinking that would push more units. Changing VHS NTSC at this point was no longer possible hence two different bandwidths for the "same" format.

    83. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sneakernet was definitely better than the Internet in some ways. Sure latency sucked, but the bandwidth was amazing. Plus as long as you traded just with friends the likelihood of the BSA finding out about your pirated software was almost nothing.

      Wow, this is a great quote... sneakernet does have awesome bandwidth..

    84. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by imthesponge · · Score: 1

      "the PAL rate is close enough as makes no difference to the film standard of 24 fps."

      As long as you don't mind everyone sounding like they've inhaled helium, and the music being in a higher key.

    85. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 1

      True, but both cassette and VHS will continue to live on. There's a lot of recordings out there that never crossed over to digital and has never been available legally on DVD. Blu-Ray will only further push those recordings into obscurity. VHS will probably never enjoy the respectability that vinyl does today as an audiophile's format, but I'm not ready to toss out the massive VHS collection I have. Once HDMI and HD are forced on us and our only option is temporary recording (Tivo) and internet streaming rentals, I think it'll be the guys like me with a surplus of analogue hardware who will prosper.

    86. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if you remember, Sony interfered with the uses of Betamax whereas JVC didn't care who used VHS. In the beginning, there was porn. Forget about legitimate Hollywood. They wanted no part of home video. Sony didn't want Betamax associated with adult films, and so prevented distributors from using Betamax. No such problems with VHS. VHS decks flew off the shelves mostly because of the adult video market as it was perceived as a safer and more discreet alternative to adult theaters.

      In any case, a lot of people fail to realize that Betamax is alive and well and is being used still professionally.

    87. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 1

      Ssssh, don't give away the farm. Let everyone else think that CDs actually do sound better than vinyl, or better yet, 128 kbps MP3. That way I can buy my records for pennies on the dollar.

      Even a entry level system like a Pro-Ject Debut III belt driven stock with a simple Bellari tube amp will blow away the stuff they sell at Best Buy. It's still an expensive capital investment though, isn't it? I see a lot of people buying into glorified computer speaker setups that connect directly to their iPods, and they're happy with that because their ears are trained on those mids. I haven't had a lot of luck convincing friends to hit eBay for vintage hi-fi equipment.

    88. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 1

      I've got a similar setup: a stack of JVC HR-S9600Us and another couple of Panies. I've got a Panasonic DVR that can records to DVD-RAM and hard drive, but it's not the quality of my VCR's recordings. If you really want control over quality, invest in a computer and some TV cards. It is a hassle as you say though. The DVR is a hassle too. With the VCR, I just hit record. This Pany doesn't make it as simple as that.

    89. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the key difference between VHS and Betamax was in the tape path, which placed less stress on the tape in the Betamax. That was a distinction techies could appreciate; consumers reacted better to the timer in the VHS (initial Betamax didn't have one), plus generally better marketing by the VHS group, led by JVC's parent, Matsushita, which also owned Panasonic, Quasar, and other brands.

      Eventually, it was the ability of the VHS camp to get more companies behind their format, all competing with various bells and whistles added to their machines, that undid Sony. Sony could not line up enough supporters to make Betamax machines, which meant lower overall production volumes, higher component costs, and higher retail price points. Even makers of blank tapes for the machines were reluctant to support Betamax as it became obvious there would be more producers selling VHS hardware.

      I was there and had access to the key people in Osaka and Tokyo as this one played out. It was a fascinating and unusual battle.

    90. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by TheTrueScotsman · · Score: 1

      High frequency response is overrated - that's how AAC+ can get away with essentially inventing the greater than 8KHz band and still sound very acceptable to most people.

      The great sound of vinyl is down the the midrange euphonic distortions (accurate it ain't) and this can be captured perfectly by recording it digitally.

    91. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      I never said I was getting rid of my VCR. I see the writing on the wall too. It's not good for analogue, especially the obscure stuff. Perhaps the laws will one day change for the better of consumers every where (and man will know when the end of the world will be, too /sarcasm).

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    92. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Still Sony is the head poncho when it comes to any developments in the blu-ray format

      Not really. It was TDK that extended the Bluray specification with a 4 layer disc (100 gigabytes), not Sony. Then they extended it again with a 200 GB disc. Sony was the inventor but now they are taking a backseat to more-capable companies inside the Bluray Consortium.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    93. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Sony didn't want Betamax associated with adult films

      (holds up Betamax video of Playboy porn) - Completely and totally false/urban legend. Betamax allowed anything you felt like recording on the blank tapes.
      .

      >>>Betamax is alive and well and is being used still professionally.

      False again. Professionals would never use the inferior Betamax shit. It's not even broadcast quality (330 lines or better). The professionals used BetaCAM which was a Component Video and Type IV Metal tape standard, in order to achieve superior video & multi-generation copy ability.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    94. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>No idea why NTSC was defined as such an odd number

      Both PAL and NTSC predated precision electronics, so they used the line frequency coming out of the wall outlet. For PAL that was 50 fields/second and for NTSC it was 60 fields/second (25 frames and 30 frames respectively). Later when NTSC-Color was invented they experienced interference between the Color Burst signal and the 60 field rate, they dropped one scanline per second, which altered the field rate to 59.997 (or something in that realm). This is known as NTSC-II.

      The final standard NTSC-III is a pure digital standard, and was developed for use with Digi-Betacam and other professional VCRs of the 1990s. NTSC-III was also used for consumer DVDs.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    95. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>anyone know why PAL VHS tapes ran significantly slower (and longer)?

      As I said above, JVC developed PAL VCRs later than the NTSC VCRs. When they did that, they chose to sacrifice horizontal resolution (240 lines instead of 250) in order to get approximately 1.5 times more video per tape. (3 hours on SP instead of 2 hours.)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    96. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>This is simply not the case, I saw both at the time on many occasions and VHS had a markedly inferior picture to Betamax.

      I hear this alot, but I've never seen it myself. I remember in college some girl played a Betamax VCR for me and she said "It makes a better picture." So I stared and stared and stared. I concluded it looked just as shitty (below broadcast quality).

      I then had an opportunity to use the college TV studio where they had Super VHS which looked amazing (dvd quality), so I bought one.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    97. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      You could be right. My Best Buy Insignia player does AAC but I've not tried other players.
      Also was it necessary to mod me "troll" just because you (or the mod) disagreed with my statement?
      Jeez.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    98. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      I have a CED videorecord player. It was obsolete when it was released (1979?) because people wanted to be able to record TV and the videorecord couldn't do it.

      If RCA had released their videorecords when first developed (1971) they would have beat the VCR to market, and probably seen a great success. It was a case of procrastination costing them the "win".

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    99. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      My radio station's DJ has a laptop that *looks* like a turntable, but is really just a round disc.
      All the "scratching" is computer-generated while playing back the MP3s. Not a real record.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    100. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>midrange euphonic distortions

      Not a clue what that means.

      And you're right AAC+ does "invent" the high-range frequencies, but not randomly. AAC's (or MP3's) SBR extension looks at the harmonics above 10,000, compresses them, and then recreates them using the sound chip. The result is not perfect but close enough to the real thing. It means you can listen to a 12 kbit/s radio station and trick the listener into thinking it's FM quality (it has the same 50-15,000 hertz range).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    101. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      While a record may sound better than CD (until after 100 plays it sounds like crap), no record will sound better than Super CD or DVD-Audio with their 0-96,000 hertz range and 24(?) bit sampling. The record is 1800s technology and obsolete.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    102. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>CD players were an expensive OEM option until the mid-90s.

      They also skipped. Who on earth wants to listen to a car or walkman CD that skips? So cassettes remained the number one format into the late 90s.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    103. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by TheTrueScotsman · · Score: 1

      >> Not a clue what that means.

      What I mean is that vinyl playback adds considerable distortions to the sound which are most evident in, and tend to accentuate, the midrange giving a 'blarey' sound. The distortions can be particularly pleasing to the ear (in my subjective opinion).

      AAC+'s 'invention' certainly isn't random since it derives the harmonics from frequencies actually in the music, but neither is it accurate (but does sound nice) and I think reinforces my assertion that HF is really not so important. Wiki has a nice quote on this:

      "The SBR idea is based on the principle that the psychoacoustic part of the human brain tends to analyse higher frequencies with less accuracy, thus harmonic phenomena associated with the spectral band replication process needs only be accurate in a perceptual sense and not technically or mathematically exact."

    104. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      despite the fact the total number of lines per second is almost identical to NTSC... huh?

      The PAL standard is defined as 25 fps, while NTSC was defined as 29.xx fps (forget exactly what).

      Read what I said again- I said the total number of *lines* per second was equal. Already replied to someone about that; see this post.

      BTW, Commodore64Love gave the apparent answer to this issue in a reply to the above post.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    105. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      The other thing is, magnetic tape has a tendency to degrade when left alone-- you'll see it in old VHS recordings and you'll hear it in old cassettes. It's a good "go-between" medium for purposes that need neither archive-quality longevity nor on-demand speed (pre-digitized recordings, data backups), but if you're looking for longevity or high fidelity, you're best off going vinyl or digital.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    106. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by BlackBloq · · Score: 1

      "In 1988, Sony would again push the envelope with ED Beta, or "Enhanced Definition" Betamax, capable of up to 500 lines of resolution"
      Right from Wiki
      Comparison to other video formats
      Size comparison between a Betamax cassette (top) and a VHS cassette (bottom).

      Below is a list of modern, digital-style resolutions (and traditional analog "TV lines per picture height" measurements) for various media. The list only includes popular formats. All values are approximate NTSC resolutions. For PAL systems, replace "480" with "576".

              * 350×480 (250 lines): Umatic, Betamax, VHS, Video8
              * 420×480 (300 lines): Super Betamax, Betacam (professional)
              * 460×480 (330 lines): Analog Broadcast
              * 590×480 (420 lines): LaserDisc, Super VHS, Hi8
              * 700×480 (500 lines): Enhanced Definition Betamax

      Digital formats:

              * 352×240 (240 lines): Video CD
              * 480×480 (480 lines): SVCD
              * 720×480 (480 lines): 4:3 DVD, Anamorphic Widescreen DVD, miniDV, Digital8
              * 720×480 (360 lines): Letterbox Widescreen DVD
              * 1280×720 (720 lines): Blu-ray (720p), D-VHS, AVCHD (720p)
              * 1440×1088 (1080 lines): miniDV (high-def variant), AVCHD (1080i/p)
              * 1920×1088 (1080 lines): Blu-ray (1080i/p), D-VHS

    107. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Don't look at me, I've found if one doesn't slurp down the FOSS or iKoolaid one tends to get modded down. Basically if the article is about an iDevice or anything to do with Linux you will get modded down if your post doesn't read like "Gee, isn't (insert product) swell? Why it sure is Biff! why (Insert RMS or Jobs) is like a God and is NEVER wrong!" so don't feel bad, thanks to /. not doing squat about ACs and sockpuppets and the broken metamod system it is pretty much SOP nowadays.

      As for your other point, running a little PC shop and talking to other shop owners I am intimately familar with this, simply because one of the first things folks do when they get a PMP is say "How do I get music on it?" and then take it to someone like me. Hell I can't even get away from it at home because word has spread I'm the "resident PC guru" so I get neighbors knocking on my door with their device in hand. I'd say roughly 5-10% is iPods, while the rest are a large mix of knock offs like Sandisk, Sony, Cowon, Creative, etc. And what I've found is while all support MP3 and WAV, and most support the older "playsforsure" WMA, very few actually support AAC. Don't ask me why, I don't build the things, but looking at device after device it is nearly all the same-MP3,WAV,WMA. If I had to guess I'd say it is because Apple doesn't license Fairplay which will mean more support calls about "Why won't my songs play" which is easier to just say "You need MP3 or WMA" and be done with it.

      I personally set up their PCs to rip as 192k MP3, unless they have Windows 7, in which case I set to 320k and have it downsample to 64k or 128k depending on the device. The reason I do this is because most of the phones that people use with these things simply won't let you hear any difference, and with the flash based 4-8Gb player (the most popular by far) the space matters more than high fidelity. My personal player is one of the last made Sandisk M260s ( I looove the fact that it runs on a aaa, which means no going dead in the field, just change and go), and with 4Gb I have over 3000 songs at 64k and still have nearly 1Gb left. And frankly when bee bopping while on a service call or working in the yard I just can't hear the difference between 64 and 192k on these earbuds anyway. That is one of the "damn that's cool" features I love about WMP12, is that you can have it rip at 320k, but when you go to put files on a portable it'll downsample to whatever bitrate you have it set to, in my case 64k. It even keeps a copy of those downsamples files so if you want to reload them onto another device the transfer is instant. Very cool.

      But if you are honest here expect the koolaid drinkers to mod you down. I cease giving a shit about it awhile back, as the upmods will cause it to wash out in the end. Just be honest and ignore the fanbois.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    108. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      Thanks for quoting me.
      (I wrote that chart.)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    109. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>If I had to guess I'd say it is because Apple doesn't license Fairplay

      Well AAC isn't owned by Apple, so that's probably not the reason audio devices don't come with AAC support. Maybe it's just cheaper to use older MP3 chips instead of upgrade to AAC-capable chips.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    110. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      Makes sense to me. (The "high frequencies are not that important" part, not the vinyl distortion part - I prefer the accuracy of lossless CD or WAV.)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    111. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      While you are correct, think help desk. What is the MOST likely AAC file a customer is liable to have? One from Apple. what did many of the AAC files come with? Fairplay. Will the average user have a clue as to which files have DRM and which don't? Let me give an example: I had to recently wipe an entire PMP recently. Why? Because after telling the user that this model didn't support WMA he proceeded to load it with more than half WMA and the thing didn't know what to do. Now why did he do that? Was he stupid? No, there simply wasn't an easy way on WMP 9 to tell WMA from MP3, so to him it was all "songs" and songs should play.

      So while I wouldn't be surprised if price isn't at least some factor, BTW, looking at a few of these things cracked open, guess what chips many are using? The old Zilog Z80. Man THAT is a trip back in time I'm sure someone who is old enough to remember the C64 can appreciate. But having had to deal with average users on the phone I bet the main reason is support calls. I have no idea how iTunes treats protected AACs, or if it is smart enough to block them being transferred, but since users can't even tell WMA from MP3 my guess is it helps cut down on support costs. Because while some support this, and some support that, they ALL support MP3, and with MP3 not having DRM it makes it simple to just say "use MP3" and be done with it. But when you say "AAC" I automatically think Apple iPod, because that is the ONLY place I've ever seen those files. if they are running AAC the odds are they have an iPod. why raise costs for a niche that most likely not buy your product? Not that I think there is anything WRONG with AAC, I just think folks never bother converting and keep what they have, the vast majority of which is MP3 with some accidental WMA.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    112. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by TheTrueScotsman · · Score: 1

      I'm a child of the seventies...

    113. Re:Daddy what's a cassette? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      They often do come with AAC nowadays - at least if one looks at what has become the "standard" portable audio player.

      Which also means not limiting ourselves to the highly visible, but ultimately atypical "iPod places" - in my decently prosperous, late EU memberstate, I can probably count the number of times I've definitely seen an iPod on the fingers of one hand (well, excluding the one I own); something like chinese S1 mp3 players was the norm for a long time. But for a few years that spot has been taken by mobile phones, usually in the form of so called "feature phones" - and most of them support AAC (many support HE-AAC and even HE-AAC+ for quite a while; something what most iPods doesn't really do). I would be very surprised if that wasn't fairly typical. And after looking at numbers, it's quite possible that Nokia alone ships more music-capable phones annually than the total of iPods ever produced; and they have only ~1/3rd of mobile sales.

      Doesn't change how mp3 seems to be still the most widely used standard. And why not? Just a case of "good enough" probably.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  4. Minor error by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The Walkman was originally introduced in the US as the "Sound-About" and in the UK as the "Stowaway," but coming up with new, uncopyrighted names in every country it was marketed in proved costly so Sony eventually decided on "Walkman" as a play on the Sony Pressman, a mono cassette recorder the first Walkman prototype was based on.

    You can't copyright a name, at least in the US. The OP should say "untrademarked names" or something to the same effect but not as poorly worded.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    1. Re:Minor error by owlnation · · Score: 1

      You can't copyright a name, at least in the US.

      Yep. You also can't copyright a name in the UK. The only thing you can do is trademark them.

    2. Re:Minor error by Kilrah_il · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thanks for the insightful comment. Everyone here at /. was at loss without this important clarification. Now can we get back to nostalgic memories of childhood days and leave silly pedantics alone for a few minutes?
      Jesus, some people never quit.

      BTW, "but not as poorly worded" is also a poorly worded sentence, but I'll leave it as an exercise for you to fix on your own. I don't believe in FTFYs.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    3. Re:Minor error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So according to you the summary should just read
      "Post your nostalgic childhood memories below."
      and contain none of that pesky historical information? What a saving!

    4. Re:Minor error by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      No, just that I believe most people here understood that the summery was talking about a trademark and not copyright, and the parent just came off as a show off.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    5. Re:Minor error by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Ya know, for the longest time I thought that FTFY meant Fuck That, Fuck You. Maybe it still does.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    6. Re:Minor error by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      I went for "Fixed That For You", but your definition also hold water, if needed.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    7. Re:Minor error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People learn by exposure. If someone reads that summary before their brain has sorted out trademarks and copyrights, it will hurt them.

    8. Re:Minor error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously not everyone does know the difference, or we wouldn't have idiots like the submitter getting copyright and trademark confused like this. Pointing out his mistake isn't "showing off" any more than pointing out that Bluetooth isn't "Wifi" or that the Web isn't "the internet" or that 3.5" diskettes with plastic shells are not "hard disks". It's just an attempt to promote basic legal literacy.

      P.S. You've effectively demonstrated that that lecturing prick here is you.

    9. Re:Minor error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copyrighting a name is impossible; the very idea of it is nonsensical. It would mean that no one could repeat the name without permission, because that's what copyright means. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that there are so many people out there who don't even understand that basic concept of what copyright is, but I really wish that people who didn't know anything about a subject like this would refrain from acting as if they did by (mis)using the terminology.

  5. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Am I wrong, but is that more units than the total human population? Needless to say... Dead man Walkman.

    I think you need to learn how to count again. The last time I checked, 200 million (if counting the cassette-based units; 400m otherwise) was considerably less than 7 billion.

  6. Back then "walkman" was fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nowadays this would be called a Walkperson.

    1. Re:Back then "walkman" was fine? by Kilrah_il · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hey, my dog used it also, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    2. Re:Back then "walkman" was fine? by iammani · · Score: 1, Funny

      Would you please think of the differently-abled?

    3. Re:Back then "walkman" was fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Like Nintendo's GameChild. PC madness, I tell you!

    4. Re:Back then "walkman" was fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful?! Sheesh. Wankers.

    5. Re:Back then "walkman" was fine? by DeadboltX · · Score: 1

      ...or an iWalk

  7. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just so you can be sure of yourself: Yes...you are wrong.

    The current human population is more than 34 times the number of Walkmans sold.

  8. Checking some history, one interesting tidbit... by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When Sony released the first Walkmans, they featured two headphone jacks and a "talk button." When pressed, this button activated a microphone and lowered the volume to enable those listening to have a conversation without removing their headphones.[2] Sony Chairman Akio Morita added these features to the design for fear the technology would be isolating. Though he "thought it would be considered rude for one person to be listening to his music in isolation" (Morita quoted in Patton[3]), people bought their own units rather than share

    (emphasis mine)
    Hm, maybe communicating across the wall, via IM, with the family/etc. isn't so bad after all...

    (the topic of "soundtrack to life" also worth noting, where the above quote came from)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  9. Halloween by PmanAce · · Score: 1

    Well it was about time no? My holloween costume from last year included a yellow walkman, some folks could have thought I was the Encino Man lol...I didn't know they were still in production!

    --
    Tired of my customary (Score:1)
  10. Music industry probably freaked out.. by ctmurray · · Score: 1

    I suspect if we look hard enough we could find some music industry comment freaking out about how this new technology was going to end the world...

    1. Re:Music industry probably freaked out.. by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      Yeah they were freaking out about cassette tapes too. And FM Radio, for that matter. The entertainment industry has a flawless record of freaking out about new technologies, even after it's shown that they make more money with those new technologies.

      In 1995 I attended a COMDEX with an exhibitor badge provided by IBM. While there I met some tinfoil-hat guys who lectured me on how the RIAA was Evil (They pronounced it with a capital E, don't ask me how) and told me about how they were planning on device-to-device encryption with the intent to kill off home recording Once And For All! That was actually the first time I'd heard of the RIAA, but those guys were astoundingly prescient. Perhaps their tinfoil had somehow managed to tune into The Future. Thus far the RIAA's implementation has been somewhat more flawed than the tinfoil guys imagined, but that could just be because you have to ease the public into that sort of thing. If you just make it impossible to record stuff overnight, the public would revolt.

      Anywhoo, just thought I'd toss that out there. Must dash now, need to purchase some heavy duty tinfoil.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:Music industry probably freaked out.. by znerk · · Score: 1

      The Dead Kennedys released a cassette with the second side left intentionally empty... probably due to the fact that there were a dozen songs, but they were each only 2 minutes or so in length.
      Quote: "Home taping is killing the music industry. This side left blank so you can help!"

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  11. No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... without this link: Finally after 20 years of court battles, the electronics giant agrees to pay the inventor of the device that made its success.

    1. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Almost sounds like a patent troll to me. What's the likelihood that between him receiving the patent in 1977 in Italy of all places and Sony pushing out the first walkman in 1979 that sony actually ever looked at that patent? Unless they found out within the same month about the patent, immediately begin research and development, while at the same time having the factory set up to produce them before they were even designed... it seems unlikely that they "stole" anything. More like coincidence that more than one person thought of putting music on tape.

    2. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks more like SONY taking a little guy's idea and running with it, thinking that he'll never have the funds to take them through court, going out of their way to make it as unprofitable as possible for him to actually get what he is due. I'm pretty sure that some variant of that phrase is hanging on the corporate walls at SONY - "Take all ya can! Give nothin' back!"

    3. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      The "little guy inventor" idea seems to be rather distant from the reality of IP law. Most of the time it seems to be the case that the big company uses it's IP to crush competitors and startup ideas.

    4. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Maybe there's more to it, but that story does not say he invented the Walkman; it says he filed a patent upon which the Walkman later infringed. The article also implies he's a patent troll: "Pavel, extremely proud of his victory, said he now plans to approach other manufacturers of Walkman-like products, including Apple Computer. Apple's white-hot iPod is to some extent the digital successor of the Walkman."

      So, it sounds like he thinks he "invented" and owns the idea of portable audio in general, which is absurd.

    5. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck Sony, I go out of my way not to buy their shit. Even if the PS3 were good I still wouldn't buy one, luckily it's a massive pile of shit with no games.

    6. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by indiechild · · Score: 1

      Agreed, Andreas Pavel sounds a lot like a patent troll to me. He's now looking at going after other companies like Apple.

    7. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

      Given the fact that he has patented the combination of a cell-phone with a music player, he will probably be a billionaire soon under current copyright law. I wonder when those big corporations will realize that this whole IP/copyright thing will blow up in their face if the laws aren't changed.

      --
      I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    8. Re:No story about the Sony Walkman is complete... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      What's the likelihood that between him receiving the patent in 1977 in Italy of all places and Sony pushing out the first walkman in 1979 that sony actually ever looked at that patent?

      So then you think that as long as you're unaware of a patent you don't have to abide by it? What you wrote is irrelevant.

  12. Sony of yesteryear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd feel somewhat more differently if Sony were still the company of the 70s and 80s, a Japanese company concerned with quality and style trying to prove its product to the world. Now they just coast, especially in Japan where their brand is still synonymous with quality because of their past successes, building for next quarter as opposed to the next 5 years (with the exception of the PS3, and even that has been mishandled). There was a reason I still have two working Sony Walkman tape players from the 80s and a working Betamax player (and a still-working set of Beta tapes including Raiders of the Lost Ark), a working 20" Sony Trinitron from 1987(ish), and yet I went through 6 PS2s and 2 PS3s. And I certainly didn't lose the ability to record TV shows on that Betamax player through a firmware update.

    1. Re:Sony of yesteryear by devphaeton · · Score: 1

      I'd feel somewhat more differently if Sony were still the company of the 70s and 80s, a Japanese company concerned with quality and style trying to prove its product to the world. Now they just coast, especially in Japan where their brand is still synonymous with quality because of their past successes, building for next quarter as opposed to the next 5 years (with the exception of the PS3, and even that has been mishandled). There was a reason I still have two working Sony Walkman tape players from the 80s and a working Betamax player (and a still-working set of Beta tapes including Raiders of the Lost Ark), a working 20" Sony Trinitron from 1987(ish), and yet I went through 6 PS2s and 2 PS3s. And I certainly didn't lose the ability to record TV shows on that Betamax player through a firmware update.

      Funny....
      I have an original PS2 (the big bricky one), and it outlasted my PS3. Blu-Ray drive blew up right after a firmware update. The fact that Sony has to issue press releases that firmware updates aren't the cause of drive failures, kinda says sumpin, no?

      --


      do() || do_not(); // try();
  13. I owned one by PatPending · · Score: 1

    I remember buying this at Neiman-Marcus in Dallas, Texas when it came out.

    Fresh out of college with no experience, and with a starting salary greater than what my uncle earned with 30 years experience as a skilled machinist, I paid $300 if I recall.

    Which was a lot of money at the time. I remember hesitating before buying it, but rationalized that after four tough years in college, and given my salary, I had earned it.

    It was robustly built and had many parts made from metal, and it lasted for many years. (Unlike the vast majority of consumer products made nowadays.)

    I don't recall what I did with it. Upon this nostalgic reflection, I'm glad I bought it.

    --
    What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
  14. Pet Pev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You CAN'T copyright a name. You can trademark a name, but that is a completely different law, with complete different rules!

    1. Re:Pet Pev by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, if the name is long and creative enough, I'm sure you also can copyright it. For example, you could use a 20 line poem as name of your product. It's probably not a good idea, but it's certainly not forbidden.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Pet Pev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not the same thing, moron. Copyrighting a poem and trademarking it as a name are two separate issues. For one thing, if you did the later, people could always reproduce the poem without issue, just as long as they didn't try to use it for their own product name within the same market. Copyrighting the poem wouldn't change that. People could STILL use the entire poem to refer your company. Two different set of laws; two different set of issues.

    3. Re:Pet Pev by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      That's not the same thing, moron. Copyrighting a poem and trademarking it as a name are two separate issues.

      You are the moron: I never claimed that copyrighting and trademarking are the same thing. However, you (assuming you're the same AC) explicitly claimed "You CAN'T copyright a name." I gave an example of a name that you can copyright. You can also trademark it (unless there's a limit to the length of names you can trademark), but that's besides the point.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  15. Really a low number by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 1

    Yeah it feels kind of a low number, you'd expect at least a significant portion of the world population to have (or had) a walkman by now. But that 200 million number refers to Sony models, and of course there are many products from other manufacturers that (ignoring Sony's brand name) would commonly be called 'walkman'. Even if limited to audio-cassette based ones. I wonder what's total number - anyone got some references?

    1. Re:Really a low number by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      No refs, but if we say that Sony had 30% of the market over the entire lifetime of the product - a feasible number as there were many, many imitators - then that suggests there were over half a billion of the things. More often than not I would encounter friends with a non-Sony unit, so one in three sounds like a good rough guess.

    2. Re:Really a low number by Paspanique · · Score: 1

      Hu? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the sad reality is the vast majority of humans live in very bad condition, where having a portable stereo device is the least of their concern. Something like can be worth more than a year's income for more than half of the population.

      --
      I don't have an intelligent phone, so I need to be.
  16. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Or a troll.

  17. Tune in, turn on, drop out by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Way back in the early 80's, an old, wise Princeton professor complained about this new trend of students constantly wearing Walkmans. His comment was, "They seem to think that life must have a soundtrack album, like a film."

    Another comment was about the trend to wear long black coats, or sectional down jackets: "They either try to look like Raskolnikov or hand grenades."

    Nowadays, when I'm out and about, most of the younger folks seem to be "tuned in." To the extent that they cannot hear a car honking at them when they ride their bikes through a red light.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Tune in, turn on, drop out by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      To the extent that they cannot hear a car honking at them when they ride their bikes through a red light.

      Darwin has something to say about this practice. It happens here a lot too, and I could not imagine anything dumber. Cycling is dangerous enough as it is without blocking one of your critical senses.

  18. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, there's less than two hundred million people in the world. Hey, douche bag: There are more people than that in the US alone.

  19. Re:What a waste! by insufflate10mg · · Score: 1

    How did you even come close to thinking that 200,020,000 is anywhere close to ~7,000,000,000? There are ~310,000,000 people in the US alone.

  20. Re:What a waste! by jaymz666 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Only seven milliard? I thought it was seven billion...

  21. Best one by johnw · · Score: 1

    My favourite Walkman - and I've still got one - is the one which is exactly the same size as a compact cassette case. It uses just a single AA battery and is an utter masterpiece of miniaturisation. There is a slight trick to how they get all the guts and motors of a cassette player within the size of a standard case, but it's still very clever.

    1. Re:Best one by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Also still have such late one...somewhere. One of the best things about it - battery life.

      I estimate around 90 hours. Once I popped in a new AA battery on Thursday, listened a bit that day; also during Friday, in the evening - on a train trip to home city, then a walk through it; and...I forgot to turn the thing off, when putting it into a wardrobe together with my coat. A trip back was Tuesday noon; it was still working. In fact, the battery was good for normal listening, around two hours each day, almost till the end of that week.

      I really miss that on the current crop of "wearable" electronics.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Best one by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      The trade-off is size. AA batteries are pretty big compared to an iPod nano.

    3. Re:Best one by sznupi · · Score: 1

      iPod nano where the volume of battery is of course not that much different; nvm how the battery tech / energy densities supposedly improved greatly.

      Everything settled on 20-30 hours. And, somehow, mp3 players using AAA (yes, smaller - but with ratings easily compared, ~2.5x smaller) are fairly pathetic (much worse than iPod nano, less than 10h - so with AA one would expect at most 30, still far from my Walkman)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Best one by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

      Then you "only" had the motor of the cassette drive to guzzle power. These days you need to power a CPU that does Fourier transformations and a few flash memory chips. Take a good guess which consumes more? I do agree, my cell phone 5 years ago had a battery life of a week, these days, you have to charge it every day. It still is a phone, it's still the same size and I don't use the camera, GPS or music player on it. It seems so many people are prepared to trade in battery life for gimmick features and size, that manufacturers have stopped extending battery life in favor of features.

      --
      I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    5. Re:Best one by sznupi · · Score: 1

      And amplifier. And some microcontroller checking reliably for long stretches of silence (I remember there were quite a few on this one cassette) to fast-forward over (which at the end of each one always ended up being "whoa, a bit too far, gotta reverse slightly"). And reversing the direction of playback every 30 minutes or so.

      These days, a lot of decoding goes on the DSP... (S1 mp3 players have z80 as their cpu) And many old wearable cassette players were also pathetic, even with two AAs. No, at least in the times of the late Walkman in question, Sony really cared about great battery life; and managed to pull it off. These days...yeah.

      (but BTW, check the battery life of, say, Nokia C1-00 ;) )

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  22. The Walkman was the end of the music industry by houghi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I remember making copies for friends and receiving them as well.
    Once it was possible, the music industry was not able to sell any more music. Artists went to get real jobs and that is why all music you hear is only done by amateurs.
    The best you can compare is what VHS did to the film industry. A few obscure independent movie makers is all that you have left.

    And all this because of piracy. Right?

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trading tapes with a few friends is a little different than trading tapes with a thousands of people.

    2. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      and before 'downloading' there were live shows, tapers (people who were allowed or not) and 'tape trees' where the parent or seeder gets 3 or more child nodes to send blanks and postage (B+P) 'up' and the parent copies the tape 3 times and mails it down. alternately, content is sent up in one cassette (or DAT, or later cd-r) and then content from the tree (what everyone wants for this particular trade, this show or whatever) is copied down to new tapes and exchanged downward to the child nodes.

      customarily, it has been a content-for-content (no money changes hands) trade or content for B+P (still no money, really).

      this really annoyed the music co's.

      and we enjoyed annoying them, but that wasn't our main goal, here. sharing the music was our goal.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by coldmist · · Score: 1

      Let's try that again, to make a point:

      Once those player pianos were possible, the music industry was not able to sell any more tickets to performances. Artists went to get real jobs and that is why all music you hear is only done by amateurs.

      Same sea change. Music is still being done by professionals.

      As much as technology changes, the *situation* is still the same. Human behavior is the same. Supply/demand curve stuff. If they want to overcharge for it, I won't pay *their* price, and can either not get it or get a copy of varying quality from someone else. It's been that way for thousands of years. The walkman didn't change it in any way.

      Now, Napster was the start of something that I don't think we had a precedent for. (Maybe the jump from no recording devices to the first ones?) Unlinking the content from any physical limitations (ie unlimited copies with very little storage/copying overhead) was an order of magnitude jump in this area. (Think the first replicator from Star Trek fame for physical stuff.)

      These kinds of things happen once in a 100-1000 years. The walkman was just the next step in a walk across the country.

      --
      Don't steal. The government hates competition.
    4. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Then you will recognize my username.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    5. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by sco08y · · Score: 1

      So back in the days of cassettes and VHS, everyone could share their entire music / video collection with anyone else in the world, more or less instantly, and there was no degradation in quality?

    6. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by sznupi · · Score: 1

      And yet Sweden, the country which gave us The Pirate Bay, is the only place in the world with sustained physical sales.

      But execs don't want to hear that much, preferring to think in the categories of their "superstars" (while in Sweden it is simply a case of many great indy acts)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    8. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill, is that you? Wow, this is great! Never though of finding you again after all those years. Please email me, at my username dot mailservice of Google, if you know what I mean.

    9. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by mangu · · Score: 1

      The best you can compare is what VHS did to the film industry. A few obscure independent movie makers is all that you have left.

      And all this because of piracy. Right?

      You joke, but unauthorized copies are causing losses to the film industry.

      After all, who would pay to watch shitty remakes when you can download the original?

    10. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      How much is too much to pay per song?

    11. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by bit01 · · Score: 1

      Trading tapes with a few friends is a little different than trading tapes with a thousands of people.

      Not particularly. Once you've got people sharing more copies than one per person it's only a question of time. And not much extra time at that due to geometric growth in numbers of copies. A significant problem with the music distribution and creation industries is widespread math ignorance except where it pertains to financial statements.

      ---

      Like software, intellectual property law is a product of the mind, and can be anything we want it to be. Let's get it right.

    12. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by 1110110001 · · Score: 1

      It's not, if you look at the people who share. It's now the same effort to share with thousands of people than it was to share with your friends 20 years ago. But it got more complicated to buy music in relation to get shared music for free.

    13. Re:The Walkman was the end of the music industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have u been living under a rock? classic artists are still making music you just dont hear them because radio sucks and doesnt play them because the advertisers will get upset. and as for indie movies, there are more indie films now than 20 years ago. the problem is, once again, giant corporations like disney & warner bros. force movie theaters not to show these films because it takes away from their $$$. welcome to the new america, if you try to compete with us, we'll pay off vendors to keep you from doing so. it's a damned shame. luckily for me, giant corporate movie makers can't stop netflix from making them availble to rent. as for music, I just subscribe to music lists so that I find out the music I like and when it's available.

  23. Home Taping is Killing Music by bgweber · · Score: 2, Informative
  24. The real news... by hipp5 · · Score: 1

    The real news here is that it took until 2010 for them to discontinue it. Seriously, who in the world was actually buying a cassette player in the last 10 years?

    1. Re:The real news... by wargod667 · · Score: 0, Troll

      i would have it it weren't for this stupid country that i live in which always suppose newest technology is what everybody wants and completely removes every tech a few years old from the lineup. but that's mainstream i suppose. Everybody except me, wont buy old tech although it's still very viable/usable and is NOT obsolete in real world applications. And on top, it would prove cheaper, since it's more 'sunk in'.

  25. I'm surprised they held out that long... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    I'm not surprised at the long persistence of tape, in general; but of Sony's persistence in the market.

    Even though the cost of a gig of flash and some cheapass SoiC may well have fallen below the cost of a tape transport, that only really helps in an environment where computers with which to load and reload the resultant low-end mp3 player are ubiquitous. Tape, while it imposes higher fixed costs on the player, allows extremely cheaply duplicated cassettes to be sold and swapped(and unlike cheap optical transports, tape is writable).

    However, even if there is still a case for tape, it has only applied in some pretty downmarket areas. In the first world, wearing a tape-player in public is practically a diagnostic signal of mental illness, now, that's how downmarket they are. For Sony, a company that prefers higher margin niches, it seems like a very odd place to be. I'll be genuinely suprised when the last cheap-n'-nearly-anonymous Chinese OEM stops making the things; but I would have expected Sony to leave the area some time ago. Perhaps their brand is still worth enough that they figured they could make some money stamping it on devices produced by somebody else, and keeping a few pennies of the premium it commanded over identical goods by lesser names?

    1. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by 0123456 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In the first world, wearing a tape-player in public is practically a diagnostic signal of mental illness, now, that's how downmarket they are.

      I'm pretty sure that my DAT Walkman will still play music better than any MP3 player on the market (at least at typical 100-200kbps MP3 bit-rates).

    2. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by rickb928 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure my Sharp MDS-702 plays better then most MP3 players. Your DAT deck is, of course, lossless, and similarly unappreciated.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    3. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Given that pretty much any player not sourced from 5 years ago or the bottom end of a flea market(and a few that were) will support one or more of FLAC, Apple Lossless, or WMA Lossless, your parenthetical statement seems like a rather glaring strawman.

      There is nothing particularly technologically wrong with DAT, particularly given its origins in a time when tape was pretty much the only economically viable way of storing substantial quantities of data(DV/mini-DV is in a fairly similar boat); but comparing it to the very low end of contemporary audio players is basically meaningless(and doubly dishonest, since DAT based walkman units are markedly less common than conventional audiotape ones, and used pretty much only by the sort of market segment that wouldn't touch a 128kb CBR MP3 with somebody else's ears)

      Obviously, lossy compression makes it trivial to make just about any mp3 player sound arbitrarily bad; but lossless compression and large internal memories are ubiquitous features on all but the cheapest modern units, making it pretty easy to get output limited only by the quality of the source material and the listening environment.

    4. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      In the first world, wearing a tape-player in public is practically a diagnostic signal of mental illness, now, that's how downmarket they are.

      I'm pretty sure that my DAT Walkman will still play music better than any MP3 player on the market (at least at typical 100-200kbps MP3 bit-rates).

      I'm sure that any MP3 player on the market playing AIFF/WAV/FLAC will play music better than your DAT Walkman (at least using a typical recording ripped from a cassette dub of a scratched-up LP that's been swallowed and pooped out by an elephant.)

      Sorry, what was the point of this again?

    5. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      We traded in the lossless aspect of quality for the convenience of solid-state technology.

    6. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      No we didn't. We traded lossless for lossy to accomodate inadequate storage space. This is no longer an excuse, but most products and systems persist in delivering us the painful, cruel, and audibly harmful 128K MP3s, instead of at least WAVs, and of course most products ignore FLAC and other alternatives so that they can impose DRM on even the music I OWN and want to convert.

      A pox on them all. I rip at 320+, I just can't stand 192 and lower.

      And yes, that means I pretty much have given up on FM radio.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    7. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Oh come now. Even the Sansa Clip+ for $40 plays FLAC. It also has a MicroSDHC expansion slot so you can put in plenty of storage too.

      DAT was badly copy-crippled in the early years, and Sony's refusal to let you make lossless copies from CD (on consumer hardware) was a massive impediment in my book. But none of that matters any more. Flash-based portable music has no drawbacks; it's practically ideal. I guess the only thing left is getting rid of storage entirely, when/if uber-reliable wireless Internet access to every album in existence becomes feasible.

      My only beef with today's fabulous and cheap options is their refusal to use good old-fashioned daylight-visible reflective grayscale LCD screens.

    8. Re:I'm surprised they held out that long... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Yeahm but a Sansa Clip+ isn't as much fun as even my Gigabeat.

      DAT copy flags weren't as much trouble as they seemed, though you had to go analog to a CD unless you pumped it through a PC and had something that didn't repect the flag. And at the time, PCs often didn't have digital audio... I know. My MinDisc had a similar problem that was 'fixed'.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  26. That's not news! by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    The news is that they were still making the things for the last 10 years.

    Although technically they're still making Walkmans. Just not cassette based versions.

  27. Sonic Stage by GoJays · · Score: 1
    The walkman may still be relevant in the portable music department if Sony didn't force the ATRAC3 format down it's users throats.

    I for one was a big supporter of the Walkman back in my highschool days and went through a couple players just from wear and tear. I skipped over the discman because I like making mix tapes and the discman was bulky and would drain batteries quickly. Once the Net walkman came out, I jumped on that because of it's size and Sony's rep for making quality walkmans. At the time of purchase I had no idea users had to use Sonic Stage to transfer music. Sonic Stage was just about the worst software I have ever used. Users were forced to use this garbage software to copy music to the player and during the process all their music was then converted to ATRAC3. The process was so painful and slow that once you had music on your player, you never wanted to change it just to avoid using Sonic Stage. Needless to say, once that netwalkman died I never replaced it and haven't gone back to Sony since.

    1. Re:Sonic Stage by sznupi · · Score: 1

      You're behind the times, their flash Walkmans are quite open. Likewise SE phones with music player functionality.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Sonic Stage by GoJays · · Score: 1

      I use my phone for music now and it support drag and drop... I just posted about my experience with Sony portable music players, which ended about 7 years ago now at least.

  28. Re:What a waste! by sourcerror · · Score: 1

    You should learn to count in English.
    billion = 1e9

  29. Re:What a waste! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Am I wrong, but is that more units than the total human population? Needless to say... Dead man Walkman.

    I think you need to learn how to count again. The last time I checked, 200 million (if counting the cassette-based units; 400m otherwise) was considerably less than 7 billion.

    Yeah, but check the timestamp on that original post - it was from 1348AD. Those Dark Age web browsers were really slow...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  30. Re:What a waste! by Kvasio · · Score: 1
  31. Actually, I invented the walkman by mspohr · · Score: 1
    In 1976, a bunch of us who were skiing at Squaw Valley made home-built "walkman" devices. We took a small automobile cassette player and a 12v battery pack and put it into a small chest pack. These first were homemade but soon after someone started selling these under the brand "Astraltune". They patented it in 1977.

    I just Googled Astraltune and it appears that Sony paid them millions for the "idea" in 2004... stupid.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  32. Huperson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We should probably start saying "Huperson" and "Woperson" as well

  33. I had one of these! by srussia · · Score: 1

    The blue model. It had that funky "hot line" button and a mic. I was convinced there was a way to make it record, but I was a child then and didn't realize that no record head, no recording.

    Good times.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:I had one of these! by srussia · · Score: 1

      The blue model. It had that funky "hot line" button and a mic. I was convinced there was a way to make it record, but I was a child then and didn't realize that no record head, no recording. Good times.

      Oops, I meant no erase head no recording.

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
  34. Huh... people still buy Sony products? by znerk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Interesting... I would have thought that the massive virus/rootkit/audio CD thing would have killed them by now. Or their yanking the plug on advertised features of their products. Or suing their users for using their products in innovative ways.

    Whatever. Sony, you can pretty much do what you want. Anyone who is still a customer of yours evidently enjoys the pain.

    --
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  35. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    w ooooooooo sh

  36. Vertical assembly by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In manufacturing, the Walkman was notable for its construction. It was designed for automated vertical assembly. In vertical assembly, all components are inserted by simple robots which move straight down to add a part to the base. The base is designed to support and align the parts so that this simple approach to assembly will work. It's fast, cheap, and fully automated.

    Apple tried vertical assembly briefly. The Macintosh IIci was designed for vertical assembly. The power supply went in vertically and clicked into the motherboard. No internal cables. Then they went over to outsourced manual assembly with cheap labor. Swatch watches also used vertical assembly. Simpler cell phones are often assembled in this way.

    1. Re:Vertical assembly by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The IIci is the only Apple case that I ever thought was super fantastic. It weighed nearly nothing and everything comes apart without tools, and more importantly, goes back together SOLIDLY. Add to that that they put the programmer's keys on the front and it's the best 68k Mac EVAR.

      Then, as you say, then went to cheap outsourced manual assembly with the Quadros and Performas and working on the inside of a Macintosh became COMPLETE HELL. Having to take drives out to take other drives out, for example.

      Thank heaven that PCs went screwless and easy-in (how ironic) and forced Apple back to making cases you could actually maintain... to the point that they became BEST at it again. Too bad those side-pull rings and such are so flimsy, not like ye olde IIci.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Obligatory by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

    Indeed: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  38. Plato by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    Oh no, so no more of those Plato ads?

  39. Not killed by the Ipod! by tchdab1 · · Score: 1

    I've seen in other stories, though not here, that the Walkman was killed by the superior Ipod.
    I hope that myth doesn't proliferate here.
    There were hundreds of mp3 players out before the ipod, which was just a better (cleaned-up) and cheaper implementation of digital "medialess" technology.
    The walkman was wonderful for its degree of portability at the time it came out.
    What could possibly kill the mp3 player, or the music-streaming service? Envision your answer now.

    1. Re:Not killed by the Ipod! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What could possibly kill the mp3 player, or the music-streaming service? Envision your answer now.
      Apple could abandon the market it created, just like Sony did.

    2. Re:Not killed by the Ipod! by JimboG · · Score: 1

      For some of us, our smart phones already have. Why carry around two devices when I can carry one that does both jobs just as well?

    3. Re:Not killed by the Ipod! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      The Walkman had already been killed by the Discman long before the MP3 players entered the scene.

  40. My Walkman mp3 is awesome by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    I had a waterproof walkman, brilliant

    then I had a solar one, fantastic

    now I have a two MP3 Walkman - the best mp3 players I ever used. and beautiful.

    I have an NWZ-A818 and a X Series - lovely. I just enjoy holding them

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:My Walkman mp3 is awesome by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Sony really drove the Walkman brand into the ground with their MP3 an NetMD players. For many years they were just horribly inferior products

  41. Re:What a waste! by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

    Ironic, in English, it's 1e12.
    American it may be 1e9

  42. Re:What a waste! by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

    I did, my maths teacher taught me that 1,000,000,000 is one thousand million and that 1,000,000,000,000 is one billion.

  43. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    No, just retarded.

  44. Prior art by stephanruby · · Score: 1

    And from the same link in the comment section of the article:

    Astraltune is the original personal portable stereo sold in the US (1975). Morita purchased an Astraltune in Aspen, Co. in 1978. Prior art can void any patent claim.

    It's too bad the Sony lawyers settled this case before crowdsourcing the research of prior art.

  45. Re:What a waste! by vakuona · · Score: 1

    Not anymore it isn't. I live in the UK, and a billion in the UK is now generally accepted to be 1e9.

  46. RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My dearist of dearist Walkman... no more.

    How we shared our monemts of life and music.

    How we changed and grew through life ... organic and digital.

    I will remember you always and even though such as batteries will no longer be available for purchase by U.S. Citizen and owernship of such will constitiute violation of law subject to execution without trial, due to an order from the Department of Homeland Security signed as an Executive Order by his majsity President Barak Hussain Oama, Lord, I will remeber our happier time listening to Frampton Comes Alive,

    Sleep well, little giant.

  47. PAL and NTSC Frames Per Second by BBCWatcher · · Score: 1

    Both standards were defined as exactly (or very close to) half the rate of the alternating current (AC) that powered them. In the U.S. 60 Hz AC is the standard, so NTSC could use a very simple circuit to translate that to 30 frames per second. The rate was decreased very slightly to about 59.94 Hz to assist with color encoding, and by that time the electronics were more advanced anyway.

    1. Re:PAL and NTSC Frames Per Second by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      ah, that makes a lot of sense!

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  48. Apple Lossless Audio Codec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on...

  49. Re:What a waste! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not anymore it isn't. I live in the UK, and a billion in the UK is now generally accepted to be 1e9.

    And has been for over 35 years.

  50. Re:What a waste! by Pescar · · Score: 1

    Nice anecdote.

    I live in the UK, and generally accept a billion to be 1e12, but assume someone means 1e9 if they're on tv or it's in their interests to exaggerate.

    Doing a physics degree, a billion is always 1e12 in the lab.

    --
    so.... you're a girl, huh?
  51. AM radio is useful in emergencies by vmaldia · · Score: 1

    The reason I still keep my 10 year old walkman is because aside from my car radio, its the only device I have that has AM radio and works during a power interruption, and I'm too cheap to buy a newer AM radio when I have one that works perfectly. AM radio is perfect for news reports during typhoons