Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sony Discontinues the Walkman

Posted by timothy on from the many-fond-memories dept.

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.

12 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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
    2. 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.

  2. 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 Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

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

  3. 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!
  4. 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.

  5. 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).

  6. 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.
  7. 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.

  8. 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?