Slashdot Mirror


Sony Announces End For MiniDisc Walkman

Beloved of concert tapers for their small size, shock resistance, and long battery life, MiniDisc recorders never much caught on with the general public. I remember playing with one in the early '90s — before high-quality solid state stereo recorders were affordable — and looking forward to the day that I would have one of my own. Playback-only decks were available, but understandably (in retrospect) never became big sellers; when MiniDisc was introduced, CDs were still a recent comer, and 8-track was fresh in the mind. Music fans were probably tired of replacing their vinyl and cassettes with the Next Big Thing. Still, with its cheap media and decent portable recorders, MiniDisc struck a chord for some uses, and stuck around better than the Digital Compact Cassette. Now, 19 years after the introduction of the MiniDisc format, Sony has announced that it will stop shipping its MiniDisc Walkman products in September, though it will continue to produce blank media.

191 comments

  1. OMG by Flipstylee · · Score: 2

    Are you like seroius? i just bought 1 like W T F

    1. Re:OMG by Flipstylee · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the double post but i own one and it was nice to have ten years ago.
      i guess technology is exponential in growth and delayed in decay? win xp support terminated just recently,
      amongst a myriad of other things, google it and produce a graph... maybe a pie chart, those are nice.

    2. Re:OMG by Khyber · · Score: 2

      "win xp support terminated just recently,"

      Only for SP2, which expired July 13, 2010, and only for 32-bit. 64-bit SP2 will get support until April 8th, 2014. SP3 is still getting support.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:OMG by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      Are you like seroius? i just bought 1 like W T F

      That must make you an early adopter of obsolete devices...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    4. Re:OMG by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      ... an early adopter of obsolete devices...

      I can't afford to buy the geek icons when they're new, but a few years later you can get them for pennies on the dollar. I have, and use regularly, a 1995 HP laserjet 5MP I bought for $5, an IBM Thinkpad X24, a Palm Pilot (collecting dust now, but I gave it a few months of intensive use). One thing is while they have all been overtaken by technology, most still perform perfectly well, have a very high build quality and are repairable and easy to find parts for, unlike most of their cheaper (new price), faster and flimsier descendants. I bought a 1990s vintage hifi CD player for my father, $10 in a charity store. New price was US$500. So thanks early adopters, I'll be buying your stuff after you upgrade.

    5. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't worry, it's still a great purchase and blank discs and full size deck are still being made and will be around for years to come. Enjoy your MD!

  2. Minidisks by hipp5 · · Score: 0

    Still exist?

    1. Re:Minidisks by plover · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Still exist?

      Exactly! Who knew? When they were released, they came out with their proprietary and incompatible ATRAC compression scheme, and some kind of copy-bit DRM, so I knew there was never any chance of me accidentally buying one. I figured they just faded into the mists of history as another example of Sony sh!tting on their customers. Apparently it was a much longer walk into the mists than I thought.

      --
      John
    2. Re:Minidisks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sonofabitch. I just finished ripping all my beta tapes to minidisc. Now what?

    3. Re:Minidisks by That+Guy+From+Mrktng · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Rip them to SACD Or MS PlayForSure

      Nobody have been burned trusting their music to Sony or MS, ever!

    4. Re:Minidisks by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      I figured they just faded into the mists of history as another example of Sony sh!tting on their customers.

      It was a long-drop, it's taken this long to reach the bottom.

  3. Now what portable recorder? by tepples · · Score: 1

    So I guess people who used to use portable MiniDisc recorders will have to switch to portable flash-based or hard drive-based recorders once their MiniDisc recorders give out. What brands are any good?

    1. Re:Now what portable recorder? by plover · · Score: 2

      A musician friend of mine just picked up a TASCAM DP-008. He was debating on whether he should buy a USB-2 or a Firewire based A to D system, and decided something he could take along to live shows without bringing the whole laptop and cable thing was even better. I think he paid about $299 for it.

      Takes SDHC cards, so an 8GB card will hold a lot of sound. But while it's an "8" track device, it can only record two tracks at a time (you can record two while playing back up to six others, supposedly it's good for live performances playing backing tracks.) And he's said the built-in microphones were "adequate".

      --
      John
    2. Re:Now what portable recorder? by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      The TASCAM DP-008 hardly fits in a (normal) pocket...

    3. Re:Now what portable recorder? by Simon80 · · Score: 1

      I found the following comparisons useful because they have sample recordings:
      http://www.audiotranskription.de/english/second-comparison-2010
      http://www.audiotranskription.de/english/organmusic

    4. Re:Now what portable recorder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True. These are the handheld models. They look pretty nice, albeit not cheap for some (e.g., the DR-2d costs $449 or so). Newegg by Zoom for $299. I have no particular experience with either of these, but $100-400 seems typical for hand-held solid-state sound recorders, rather than the "voice" ones that are pretty variable in quality. There seem to be plenty of options to replace MiniDisc recorders. I'm kind of surprised it took this long for MiniDisc to go extinct.

    5. Re:Now what portable recorder? by plover · · Score: 1

      No, it certainly isn't pocket-sized. If you were to show up at a concert with one, even the most cursory obligatory no-liquor-inside pat-down would find it.

      --
      John
    6. Re:Now what portable recorder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the Tascam DP-03 which is unobtrusive, takes microSDHC cards and USB interface, built-in stereo microphones (and is even better with binaural mics), and encodes on the fly either raw 44.1 khz, 48khz .WAVs or 320 kbps and 192 kbps .mp3s. It's a very nice little unit and cheap (under $100).

    7. Re:Now what portable recorder? by residents_parking · · Score: 1

      The Zoom H1 is a good fit. It's a significant upgrade from MD while being very affordable.

    8. Re:Now what portable recorder? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Get a Zoom H1 or H4n, they have excellent battery life and the H4n can lay has XLR microphone inputs (and can run phantom power!) if you need that. Sony also makes a PCM-D50 which is more expensive but it has a real gain pot for the microphones and it has better mics than the Zoom onboard ones IMHO -- on the Zoom you can only control the mic gain by hitting buttons, so you hear a big "click" on the recording when you tweak levels.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    9. Re:Now what portable recorder? by ZosX · · Score: 1

      I've seen these before and heard their results and they are very, very nice. I would buy if I wanted something to sample with or say record audio as a separate source from a camera. Yes they are pricey, but good mics can easily run into the thousands.

  4. Too bad by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

    I wanted a cheap MD-Data drive but they weren't available at the time; to me, Minidisk recorders themselves mostly became affordable just around the time that they were ceasing to look the best option. Maybe if I'd been older and had more funds, things would have been different. It's all a bit of a shame though because it was a cool technology that I did want to play with.

    1. Re:Too bad by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Same here. I remember reading about MD-Data when it was first released. A 140MB removable drive, with cheap disks (a fraction of the price of ZIP disks, only 2-3 times more expensive than floppy disks), smaller than floppy disks and much smaller than CDs. When they were released, my computer had a 60MB hard disk, MD-Data sounded amazing but I never actually saw one.

      If Sony had pushed MD-Data a bit more, they'd have owned the floppy-replacement market. MD Data was much more suited to laptop use than recordable CDs and took less space than a floppy disk drive. They would probably have held that market until flash drives became cheap. With the 1GB disks, it would probably have lasted until quite recently.

      I don't think Sony even made a laptop with one, which was a huge shame. They should have made MD-Data the only built-in removable storage device on their laptops, made floppy drives optional on their desktops, and licensed the drives to a second source for other manufacturers. People would have complained for a bit, then wondered how they managed with the bulky 3.5" disks that only had 1% the capacity of a MiniDisc. Using them just for music was a huge waste.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Too bad by Artifex · · Score: 1

      Yours is the comment I came in to write! I did see a picture of a portable MD Data drive plugged into a laptop when the format(s) was first introduced (there was another disc format they announced that was part pre-recorded and part blank, too, which at the time would have been interesting for games), and it was definitely before Zip disks really caught on. This would have been the format to beat, and I kept waiting for a drive to finally show up for consumers.

      I used to wonder why they never marketed it widely, but now I think I've guessed: because the MD music format was already out, they might have been afraid that allowing a direct attachment to a computer would enable people to rip their music and record copies on other discs. That's exactly the kind of thinking Sony has used when it's shot itself in the foot time and time again, the only difference being this was before everyone started making MP3s.

      p.s. I still have my MDS-101, but I only ever bought maybe 3 pre-recorded MDs before they stopped selling them, locally. How depressing.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    3. Re:Too bad by atamido · · Score: 1

      I used to wonder why they never marketed it widely, but now I think I've guessed: because the MD music format was already out, they might have been afraid that allowing a direct attachment to a computer would enable people to rip their music and record copies on other discs. That's exactly the kind of thinking Sony has used when it's shot itself in the foot time and time again, the only difference being this was before everyone started making MP3s.

      This. Sony screwed itself over when it got into the content production market. That division has effective killed every interesting technology they've come out with in the name of keeping their content safe. (Ironic considering that there probably isn't a single piece of content they own that can't be downloaded for free from the internet.)

      Had they immediately made MD-data drives available and licensed the technology out to everyone, it would have easily become a standard. Instead the smaller capacity and more expensive Zip disks picked up popularity and then quickly faded due to poor capacity and reliability problems. MiniDiscs in the US were relegated to a niche market that they died in. The computer world would have been a very different place if Sony hadn't screwed themselves over with their own greed.

  5. loved minidiscs by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    They were awesome for recording music. I still have mine somewhere I believe. It is sort of a shame to see them die but the disks are a hassle.

  6. Excuse me? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    with its cheap media and decent portable recorders

    There were a lot of things to describe minidisc, but cheap is not one of them. It was not cheap in comparison to any other media you could buy at the time, which may well have been a part of why so few people ever bought it. Minidisc was a neat idea, but it was never at a practical price point.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Excuse me? by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      They were a lot cheaper than DAT (digital audio tape) equipment and media. Even though Minidisks used compression, the quality was, for most enthusiasts, more than adequate. That is why I got a Minidisk, after looking long and hard at portable DAT equipment.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    2. Re:Excuse me? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      It was in the rest of the world. I remember visiting the US thinking "cool, I can stock up on cheap MD discs since everything is cheaper than in the UK" and was amazed to find that the media was expensive since no one seemed to be interested in the format. It was a superb replacement for tape at a time when no one had even heard of "mp3s".

      None of the "pro" MD decks Sony released (which are still used in radio - they are common in the industry) had the stupid SCMS copy protection that was mandated on the consumer hardware, but even with that limitation (unable to make copies more than one generation down using optical/coax digital connections) it was awesome.

      Lots of people moaned (as does TFS above) that "I just replaced everything with CDs and now there's this?!" but it was never designed to replace CDs - it was designed to replace analogue tapes - a task it excelled at.

      I still use my MD deck from time to time. Enough that it's plumbed into my audio setup (via optical connections - I don't have to worry about "evil proprietary" ATRAC).

    3. Re:Excuse me? by HiggsBison · · Score: 1

      There were a lot of things to describe minidisc, but cheap is not one of them.

      I went shopping for one of these after they had been out for a year or two. I went to the Sony store on Michigan Avenue in Chicago. They wanted $800 for a portable player. They assured me that people in Japan were snapping 'em up by the dozen.

      I never bought the hype, and they never made it anywhere near affordable. In retrospect, yeah, Sony is kind of clueless that way.

      --
      My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
    4. Re:Excuse me? by Artifex · · Score: 1

      It was not cheap in comparison to any other media you could buy at the time, which may well have been a part of why so few people ever bought it.

      I believe Zip discs were over $15 each for a long time. MD-Data would have probably sold for around the cost as the blank music ones, which was cheaper ($9-13?)
      As MD was smaller, had higher capacity, and was more rugged, this should have been a slam dunk.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    5. Re:Excuse me? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't marketed very well either. Most people didn't know they existed.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    6. Re:Excuse me? by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      I went shopping for one of these after they had been out for a year or two. I went to the Sony store on Michigan Avenue in Chicago. They wanted $800 for a portable player. They assured me that people in Japan were snapping 'em up by the dozen.

      Really? I bought one at a big box electronics store (portable Sony MiniDisk player/recorder) for about $50. This was maybe 10 years ago or so. It was a lot smaller and lighter than a portable CD player at the time and cost about the same. I still use it to this day although it has gotten a lot harder to find blank media.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    7. Re:Excuse me? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      It was not cheap in comparison to any other media you could buy at the time, which may well have been a part of why so few people ever bought it.

      I believe Zip discs were over $15 each for a long time.

      I should have been more specific, in that minidisc was used pretty well just for music on the market; I never saw a reader or recorder for using them on a PC.

      That said, the format that should have eaten iomega's lunch on the portable storage front (before CD-R became cheap, of course) was the LS-120 superdisk. One drive could read and write regular floppies as well as LS-120 discs, and the discs themselves were cheaper than the Zip discs. But they were too late to market to make any kind of difference; of course later on they were both driven into oblivion by CD-R discs.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    8. Re:Excuse me? by HiggsBison · · Score: 1

      Really?

      Yes, really. It was around 1993 or 1994, and I was comparing it with tape players like the Walkman. I just checked Wikipedia and, yes, due to the dollar/yen they had to introduce it at about $800 or so.

      --
      My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
    9. Re:Excuse me? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I remember looking into this in the late 90s. The choice was a portable CD player, or a portable MD player, both from Sony (which was a decent company at the time). The CD player was twice the size didn't let me record anything, and came in at $30 less than the MD player (both lower end players). Investigating a portable CD recorder I found they were twice the price. DAT tapes were rare and where also dead expensive.

      The only portable recording format that was cheaper than MD at the time was good old analogue tape, and I wanted to replace that for sound quality reasons.

      I don't think you realise just what you were getting with an MD player. Sure when MP3 came out the bottom dropped out of the industry and MD was a worthless choice and the NetMD was doomed to failure. But for a while it was the best and cheapest piece of equipment on the market.

    10. Re:Excuse me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a superb replacement for tape at a time when no one had even heard of "mp3s".

      That's very true, but there wasn't enough room to put a full album on it so the record industry didn't really get behind it, and instead went with the full-size CD. Right around that time people were really looking for more storage with their removable media, and CD's won out over the smaller form factor because the blanks ended up getting so cheap.
      It is rather too bad, I would have preferred to see the 3.5" form factor stick around; I really hate large removable media. But there's not much chance of ever seeing those days return, flash chips and USB drives have pretty much killed the market for removal media... everything is now detachable external storage.

      And before people start hollaring about "Japan and Europe had them all over the place" Yes, Japan has all kinds of flash-in-the-pan tech that only shows up for a couple years, and is gone before the rest of the world notices. As for Europe, yes they did start to get popular but not until the end of the 90's and into the early 00's, and by then it was already old tech... remember that CD's were late 80's and early 90's, by the end of the 90's we were already looking for recordable DVD blanks to hit the market. Who is going to use a stack of mini-CD's for storing data when a single DVD will more than do the trick, and cost less for blank media?
      I hate to sound like a jerk, but folks in Europe really got sold a pig in a dress. The only reason they had such success is because Sony realized they weren't selling in the US (most people still had their cassette tapes or were buying full-sized discmans) and basically used the continent to Dump all their stock before it went obsolete.

  7. Quite popular outside the U.S. by amaupin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...MiniDisc recorders never much caught on with the general public.

    Never much caught on in the U.S., you mean.

    In the late 1990's, early 2000's portable minidisc players/recorders were incredibly popular in Japan and Europe.

    1. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is absolutely correct, They never were very popular here in Canada either but i would say at least a third of the international students i knew from europe back in 2000-2004 had minidisc recorders and/or players and a sackful of the bloody things. This was especially apparent among the music department internationals.

    2. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I think 1/3 is pushing it and while I don't have very many friends or know what players all of them had atleast I know two persons who had minidisc players, and one of them had two at different times. I also think someone had a DAT deck.

      This was probably around the pre 128MB MP3 player but post CD-introduction novelty.

      The obvious advantages being size and record-ability.

      Both factors and also wasn't they more shockproof ? make them much better choices than regular CD players (which could also have a memory for some shockproofness.)

      However not all of them could record which is kinda stupid unless you have a deck as well which one of the guys had.

      Enter MP3 format and downloadable music and the fact you couldn't transfer music from your PC to your MiniDisc without recording the sound and you start to see how the format would fail.

      Later that was fixed by introducing the NetMD but since Sony is Sony they decided to keep their encoding technique and don't adopt to MP3 so you still had to convert the music and transfer it with (still Sony being Sony) their software.

      I guess Apple had joined the game by now and was obviously just as retarded since Apple is Apple. But maybe they could play MP3s and if nothing else transfer maybe worked smoother / less retarded software?

      I was looking at NetMDs but this just seemed all to retarded.

      Late there was HiMD which I think might had solved this or if it just gave better storage but still no MP3s, I don't remember, but it was a little to late and if they missed either factor they also missed me as costumer. Too little too late, Sony failed it.

      Later Sony also introduced flash-memory based music players, but guess what? They didn't played MP3 either.

      Well done Sony. You're so fucking retarded.

      Very late they fixed that to but by then iPod carried much more heft than Walkman. And while putting Walkman on Sony-Ericsson phones might had added some value to the brand and phones by now I think they have killed the brand?

      USB transfer and native MP3 playback and Sony might still had have the lead and have offered magneto-optical expandable portable music players. But that would had required Sony not being Sony.

    3. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by Vahokif · · Score: 1

      Really? I'm from Europe and I've only seen once in my entire life, in Norway.

    4. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      In the late 1990's, early 2000's portable minidisc players/recorders were incredibly popular in Japan and Europe.

      I wouldn't go so far as to say they were "incredibly" popular in the UK (i.e. Europe). They were still *nowhere* near as big as traditional cassettes nor CDs at their peak- but they definitely did seem to enjoy a noticeable boost of success around that time. What I didn't get was why MiniDisc suddenly became moderately popular here at the turn of the millennium, several years after the format had originally come out and apparently done nothing.

      Two possible reasons- one, they reduced the price to the point where it became affordable to students and young people(?); two, I heard that they started a commercial push around that time. Don't know which, if either, is correct.

      At any rate, after that brief flush of success, they seem to have disappeared, replaced by the rise of cheap MP3 players. They were never really around long enough to become established. I suspect they lasted longer in Japan because they were more popular there in the first place.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    5. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by andreasg · · Score: 1

      Well, they never really had a large selection of playback-only discs in stores here in europe, so incredibly popular might be a bit overstated.

    6. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Really? I'm from Europe and I've only seen once in my entire life, in Norway.

      Same here, and I've never seen one. Maybe the OP, like Bush, was talking about New Europe rather than Old Europe. It's quite possible that they were popular in places where tractors are ministers and people sit down to a dinner of boiled radiators.

    7. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incredibly popular in Europe? Well, no. At least not in France. I've seen only one friend with a portable Minidisc player and that was like 5 years ago.

      I didn't know anything about the FSF, free software or DRM back then. But reading the user guide and seeing all the restrictions, I remember I thought I'd be better off with a good old cassette player. Looks like these antifeatures never allowed the Minidisc to become popular. Good job Sony.

    8. Re:Quite popular outside the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Europe they have never been popular except in some small niche.

      I'm Italian and I used to own one and I was what here we call a "white fly".

      And around here it was also very difficult to find blank media for them. I used to buy them in bunches in the rare places where they had them, which were just a few shops in the main cities(Milan and the capital, Rome) and a few luxury vacation resorts. Finding recorded media for it was almost impossible. After year 2000 there was no trace of it anywhere. I thought they were already discontinued.

      And as a side note, I was very disappointed too by how Sony did never ship the MD-Data.

  8. Sony, I am disappoint by Megane · · Score: 1

    Sony has tried again and again to get its proprietary media formats accepted by the public, but with the exception of the 3 1/2" floppy (when Apple and HP chose it over the other two competing formats), none ever stuck. And even that was a failure as a digital camera media format. The next closest was Beta, which lost against VHS, with only a niche afterlife in the different BetaCam format.

    UMD is all but dead (once the PSP goes end-of-life it will truly be dead), Memory Stick (the Duo version, at least) is still holding on due to Sony's own Not Invented Here mentality about the industry standard, MiniDisc never was more than a niche in the US. Anything else they came up with is so obscure that I can't even remember it right now.

    Farewell and good riddance to another orphan Sony media.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    1. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by daitengu · · Score: 1

      I think you're forgetting Blu-Ray.

    2. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blu-Ray says hello.

    3. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bluray retard.

    4. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      the 3 1/2" floppy (when Apple and HP chose it over the other two competing formats), none ever stuck. And even that was a failure as a digital camera media format

      Back when the Sony Mavicas were using 3.5" floppies I was working at CompUSA (before it was Comp-Mexico, of course!). I worked the camera/upgrades counter quite a bit, and I was always surprised how much of a premium people were willing to pay for those stupid Sony cameras. Granted, smartmedia and compactflash were the dominant standards of the time and they were maxing out at 32 and 64mb respectively, and weren't cheap. But it still beat the hell out of carrying a bag full of floppy discs, and they were dramatically faster in read and write - and battery life was far superior on those than the Sonys.

      Yet some people apparently wanted low-res battery-sucking cameras that used floppy discs. And I was happy to sell them those cameras.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    5. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      My thought exactly.

      My first reaction, was let it just die already and GIVE UP. I do not like Sony. Infact, I hate it. My ex had a Sony camcorder, Sony Vaio, and a camera. She freaked out when I lost her only memory stick for the camera. Why? You can't get it anymore. Memory stick 2.0 is not compatible with 1.1 or whatever it was and they no longer sell it. Lose the stick and the Sony Camera is useless. Also her Vaio only accepted these sticks. If she upgraded to a laptop that didn't get 200F and melted her clothes, she could not upload her photos.

      Terrible products and it seems only a small minority use them, but those of us that do are stuck on an upgrade use trendmill every few years. I will never buy a Sony product. In the 1980's Sony meant quality and made great walkman and TV's but it seems American style management made them go cheap and use proprietary hardware like IBM to milk its consumers.

    6. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Most likely it was because you could read the floppy on any computer, while memory cards required a special reader, or you had to connect the camera to the computer (and remember to bring the cable) etc. And carrying a bag of floppies wasn't all that different from carrying a bag of film. Also, if you ran out of either, you could go to a store and buy some, since they were affordable.

    7. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      bluray retard.

      Is that like Down Syndrome?

      Doctor: "I'm so sorry Mrs. Jones. But your son has Bluray Retardation. We have social workers that can help you cope with your special needs child or if you want, we can help you put the child up for adoption."

    8. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of something called Compact Disk? That used to do well. DVD is still going strong and Bluray is doing better than I expected with digital download/streams as competitors. Sony had something to do with developing of all these disk formats.

    9. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by sakdoctor · · Score: 2

      Does blu ray really reach the definition of "accepted by the public" though?

    10. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Blu-Ray is a moderate success, but it's not really a "Sony" format. At least no more than CD and DVD were.

      The Blu-Ray association had a number of members including Philips, Thompson, and Samsung.

    11. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      And carrying a bag of floppies wasn't all that different from carrying a bag of film

      Except that floppies held fewer pictures than a roll of film, and were less reliable.

      And a smartmedia/compactflash card would hold a lot more, at higher resolution.

      Also, if you ran out of either, you could go to a store and buy some, since they were affordable.

      It didn't take long for the cards to cost less per megabyte than floppies, and they read and wrote much faster.

      And if your Sony camera battery went dead, you were hosed. Only the Sony charger could charge the Sony battery, which was heinously expensive if you were out somewhere and forgot either. Many other cameras at the time ran on AA batteries, and made it a lot longer on a set of batteries than the Sony cameras made it on a charge, as the other cameras had no moving parts to suck down battery life.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    12. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it seems that Sony formats can succeed but only if they're co-developed by other companies.

      I suspect part of this is a perception that you don't really want to compete with the organisation that owns the technology.

    13. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by kevinmenzel · · Score: 1

      In Canada it seems to have pretty decent success... though Apple is really hindering it... I know a lot of people who stopped buying DVD when they bought Bluray players/drives, and I admit, I'm one of them - but many of my friends in school or early into their careers never bought TVs and just run everything from their computers - and more than a few of them have Macbook Pros as their only computer. At which point, short of buying an external drive, and a copy of Windows, and installing boot camp, and rebooting into Windows every time they want to watch a commercial Bluray disc, they aren't watching Bluray on their machines. Many of these people appreciate the visual quality of Bluray, as laptop users they do sit quite close to their screens, and download caps from their campus wireless or their ISP means they aren't exactly in a position to download a whole lot of HD content, but until they get diferent computers (as Apple shows no signs of admitting there is a use for optical media in this world still) they'll just never switch from DVD. But in terms of success, I mean, even my parents have a bluray player. They actually got one before I did, because they were moving into a new house, buying a bigger TV, and wanted to be able to buy and stuff in HD.

    14. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Megane · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, Blu-Ray. I forgot about it because it doesn't exist to me.

      It's not accepted by ME because 1) I don't need that high resolution (older eyes for one thing), 2) I don't need Sony's flavor of DRM, and 3) I don't want to be subjected to more unskippable ads. When downloading, I go for the 480p version. I like that I can rip a DVD whenever I want to for format-shifting. I like that I can use "unofficial" DVD player software and skip ads.

      And it only won because Sony basically bought out the competition.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    15. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Megane · · Score: 1

      Compact Disc: Industry association led by Philips. (Though a guy at Sony did insist on the 72 minute requirement.)
      DVD? Another industry association.
      Blu-Ray: I see no reason to have it, as DVD is more than "good enough" for me. Also, it only won after Sony effectively bought out the competition.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    16. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Mini-Disc wasnt a total failure, it did enjoy wide adoption in certain regions. The main problem was Sony trying ot be Sony and hold the reins of technology too tight.

      --
      Good-bye
    17. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by hedwards · · Score: 1

      You do realize that you can just remove the protection, right? The encryption has been broken for quite some time now. AnyDVD HD

    18. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by westlake · · Score: 1

      Does blu ray really reach the definition of "accepted by the public" though?

      The neighborhood Red Box rents Blu Ray. Blu Ray disks and players are prominently displayed at the Walmart superstore less than 10 miles up the road.

      That is a pretty good working defintion of mainstream - suburban - acceptance.

    19. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by grumling · · Score: 1

      I would imagine most of your customers were Realtors®, a group not known for their technical prowess.

      --
      "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    20. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      It feels like it is on the edge of being accepted. DVD's still feel more popular for some reason. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    21. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      1) Uh... okay, sure.
      2) Easily removed.
      3) Easily removed/skipped.

    22. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      Still missing some context...

      Those cameras I don't think went beyond 2 Megapixels, so fitting a dozen images on a floppy was possible. It was generally cheaper to buy a 100 pack of floppies than 144MBytes of flash memory, and at that it came with the added bonus of having a box of floppies handy for data storage. Finally, if someone wanted a picture, all you had to do was put in a fresh floppy, take the photo, and give it to them. Floppies were cheap and easy to give away. No one was going to part with a CompactFlash card or keep one around to hand out. If you were away, you could immediately view photos on any computer without a card reader or special cable. On the spot photo sharing is common place now with camera phones, but even now there's the caveat of having to provide someone with your cell number or e-mail address.

      There wasn't much in the way of a guarantee that flash memory would be a race to the bottom, or which format would win. Seen any SmartMedia cards on a shelf recently?

      While the Sony batteries were expensive, they still lasted longer than most digital camera batteries of their day. Most would eat through a pair of batteries after 40-50 pictures, so it wouldn't take too long for even wholesale packs of batteries to exceed the cost of the Sony battery, and having an 8-pack was essential. Yes, NOW we can get 200-300 photos out of a pair of AA batteries, but that wasn't the case during the era of the floppy camera.

      None of this is true anymore, but floppy disk photos made hella lot of sense in 1999.

    23. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Those cameras I don't think went beyond 2 Megapixels

      I already mentioned the Mavicas were awful for resolution in comparison to anything remotely close to the same price point. That was understood by the consumer and the entire market.

      It was generally cheaper to buy a 100 pack of floppies than 144MBytes of flash memory

      Not for very long, it wasn't. The various standards of flash media came down quickly in price while floppies stayed static in price and eventually started going up.

      the added bonus of having a box of floppies handy for data storage

      That was a poor excuse for a fringe benefit, really. 3.5" floppies were notoriously unreliable; I had more than a few discs die on me just in the time it took to walk across a room from one computer to another (sneakernet).

      Floppies were cheap and easy to give away.

      And if you were lucky, the disc would even survive long enough for the other person to read the image from it!

      There wasn't much in the way of a guarantee that flash memory would be a race to the bottom

      If you're referring to price, that was certain even in the early days. The standards were open enough that there were several manufacturers for each major format and they were frequently working to beat each other's prices.

      At one point I kept a board on the counter, listing the cheapest prices we had per mb for each format so customers wouldn't have to ask me.

      While the Sony batteries were expensive, they still lasted longer than most digital camera batteries of their day.

      Simply not true. The Sony cameras were unique in that they were the only ones that needed moving parts to write files, hence they quickly consumed more power for the same amount of file writing and reading than any other system on the market.

      Even first-generation smartmedia could run circles around the floppy, as it was surface written and needed minimal power to write files. It ran circles around compactflash of the day for reducing power consumption, but compactflash eventually caught up.

      but floppy disk photos made hella lot of sense in 1999

      First of all, the floppy disc system didn't make sense, even when Sony thought it was a great idea. If anyone had a reasonably decent system based on diskettes, it was Panasonic who at least used the superdisk 120MB; except of course nobody had drives for it so that was worthless too.

      And second, no reasonable person uses the term "hella" anymore.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    24. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      You know, Blu-ray is another industry association..

      Wonder why it's seen as a Sony format.

    25. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by sunspot42 · · Score: 1

      Does Blu-Ray really meet the definition of a "Sony proprietary format"? Unlike their Memory Stick or MiniDisc, Blu-Ray was developed in conjunction with others, including Philips, who Sony developed the CD with, Pioneer, who were involved with developing the core laser technology utilized by Blu-Ray, and Samsung, among others: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association

      Blu-Ray is more like DVD than like Betamax or MiniDisc. I think it's thought of as a "Sony" format in part because Sony was the first to push it and push it really hard with the PS3.

    26. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by bluegreen997 · · Score: 1

      That was a poor excuse for a fringe benefit, really. 3.5" floppies were notoriously unreliable; I had more than a few discs die on me just in the time it took to walk across a room from one computer to another (sneakernet).

      I'm old enough to have used real 'floppy' disks and as such also used the 3.5" disks plenty as well. And while some times any disk would fail they were not 'notoriously unreliable' as you say. Hell AOL send them though the freakin mail for a long time and they would survive that and then you could use them as a free disk!

      What I do remember was that there could be bad/cheap media. I remember sitting around many times and formatting disks and noting which ones were full formats, which ones you could do extended formats on, and which ones were old/bad/cheap that you would have to have FAT mark bad sectors on.

    27. Re:Sony, I am disappoint by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And now let's try to find a format that was a) from Sony, was b) successful and had c) any competition worth mentioning.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Audio quality by JavaBear · · Score: 1

    I haven't found anything else with comparable audio quality. I know the ageing ATRAC codec used on Minidiscs are inferior to the latest generation codecs, such as AAC, but the D/A converters and amplifiers were far superior to those in the latest portable units, even iPods which are not just hampered by poor amplifiers, but also shoddy encoding and a high level of dynamic compression in iTunes. And I must say that as a portable recorder they actually seem to be cheaper than comparable solid state recorders.

    1. Re:Audio quality by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      IIRC some of them could record in uncompressed PCM. Maybe I should look into buying one. I sometimes want to record audio to a digital format but using a PC to do that (and using the PC for anything else while it records) leads to glitches, so I'd like to record to some device then copy the data to a PC, right now recording to PC is less convenient than recording to a cassette, but sometimes I want to have the music in a digital format.

    2. Re:Audio quality by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      Most, if not all of the Hi-MD recorders have LPCM as an option, here you get about 90 minutes on a 1GB disc, and the last version of their SonicStage utility you can up- and download any content, even "protected" discs, from their Net-MD units. I still use my Sony MZ-RH1 on occasion, which is identical to their MZ-M200. On an ending note, I said it back when the PSP came out, and I'd like to repeat it again; Sony should have used the Hi-MD format in their PSP, and settled on a slightly modified higher density version for game content if necessary. UMD have a 1.4GB capacity if I recall. The main problem with Sony is that when it comes to Consumer products, they just can't stop "fixing" things that aren't really broken.

    3. Re:Audio quality by jsdcnet · · Score: 1

      I haven't found anything else with comparable audio quality. I know the ageing ATRAC codec used on Minidiscs are inferior to the latest generation codecs, such as AAC, but the D/A converters and amplifiers were far superior to those in the latest portable units, even iPods which are not just hampered by poor amplifiers, but also shoddy encoding and a high level of dynamic compression in iTunes. And I must say that as a portable recorder they actually seem to be cheaper than comparable solid state recorders.

      iPods don't encode anything. Maybe you're thinking of iTunes? If your encodings are shoddy, use a different encoder. The dynamic compression ("SoundCheck" in Apple lingo) can be disabled via the Settings menu. iPods are also capable of storing and playing Apple Lossless (ALAC) files, which sound identical to the original source.

      --
      no longer working for cnet
    4. Re:Audio quality by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      The problem with dynamic compression sticks deeper than the players and recorders. Hardly any music released today is worth listening to, and the "loudness war" have just made bad releases (and remasters) worse. An example. I had an old CD, dating back to the early 90's. Sadly it had to endure one too many dorm room party. I stumbled upon a re-release of that groups music at a nice low price, but I was finding my self unable to enjoy the music. I don't have "enthusiast" ears, but something was wrong with it. I then bought one of the tracks on iTunes. and it was tee same. I finally managed to rip that track off the old CD, with a not of problems on it, but enough to be able to look at the wave form in an editor. Comparing the three tracks in question the waveform was dramatically different. The original release was very dynamic throughout the track, most of the track was sitting at -6dB or less, with transients (and errors) spiking now and again. This is how it should look. The other two were pretty much a solid block from start to finish, with nearly no segment dropping below the nearly ruler straight top and bottom peaks. This is why the bass on mist audio these days sound like is it "drowning" out everything else for a short while before and after the bass hit. And that the bass sound more like someone hitting a wet whoopee cushion rather than a bass drum. It's a general problem for the industry, but iTunes' re-encodes and the poor quality hardware in the iPods are just making things worse.

    5. Re:Audio quality by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      Ok, where the hell did all my linebreaks go??

    6. Re:Audio quality by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      UMD wasnt a terrible idea, it was that Sony never let us make burn our own discs. Name one popular media format that DOESNT have recordable media.

      --
      Good-bye
    7. Re:Audio quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost like your post was dynamically compressed.

    8. Re:Audio quality by hjf · · Score: 1

      Name one popular media format that DOESNT have recordable media

      Vinyl.

    9. Re:Audio quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vinyl records?

    10. Re:Audio quality by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Fine, name one non-deprecated media format that DOESNT have recordable media. For the record, Vinyl was a step back in this regard, as the wax cylinders that preceded them were user-recordable. They traded the ability to record for durability.(and other considerations)

      --
      Good-bye
    11. Re:Audio quality by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 1

      ...but also shoddy encoding and a high level of dynamic compression in iTunes.

      What? iTunes AAC encoder is one of the best around and it's MP3 encoder, whilst not as flexible as LAME, stacks up very well. As for the dynamic compression, I don't know what you're talking about - iTunes doesn't do anything to the music in the way of eq or compression when it encodes it. There is an option to normalise tracks, but it's off by default and it's done at playback, it doesn't change the data on disk.

      That all said, I've still gyt my MZ-R50 around which was one of the best MD walkmans ever made, especially with the tweak where you could short out the control pins on the headphone plug (the flat plug that the remote uses to communicate to the main unit next to the headphone jack) with a 24k resistor while toggling the hold switch and put it into service mode. Once in service mode, you could disable SCMS for the unit and record digital copies to your heart's content.

    12. Re:Audio quality by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 1

      UMD wasnt a terrible idea, it was that Sony never let us make burn our own discs. Name one popular media format that DOESNT have recordable media.

      Vinyl.

    13. Re:Audio quality by Divebus · · Score: 1

      Popular Science February 1935 has an article about recording audio directly to a record - a shellac or lacquer disk. I had a record cutting machine intended for consumers. It was made in 1946 and worked pretty well. Since I couldn't get the lacquer blanks anymore, I recorded on plexiglas. Or how about the 1957 Mutoscope Voice-O-Graph, a walk-up voice recording thing about the size of a phone booth. You stick in coins, say something into the microphone and out comes a record. Technically, it isn't vinyl but the phonograph was in fact recordable media.

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    14. Re:Audio quality by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      UMD was a stopgap until they had PSN ready and flash came down in price. They needed good capacity, cheap...and a disc format was the only choice. .Having MD in the PSP would have made it even bigger and people were already complainging about the size of the thing compared to the GBA.

    15. Re:Audio quality by hjf · · Score: 1

      All media is recordable. Wether the recordability is easy or cheap is another matter.

  10. media / reader by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since floppy discs have died I have missed having a medium which I could copy to then give away and which could be reused as easily.

    1. Re:media / reader by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Glad i am not the only one. I still would love to see cheap 5x-10x packs of small usb sticks or similar. There are ways to format optical RW media to behave like floppies, but it never seemed to catch on. Likely because of the "rarity" of the drives and cost of media when introduced. And perhaps a lack of native support in Windows. Tho one format i tried had the "feature" of auto-installing the required driver on first insertion.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:media / reader by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      128 MB-2GB USB sticks from China are SUPER CHEAP. Cheaper then floppies were back in the day. We give these away to clients all the time. http://www.epromos.com/promotional-usb-flash-drives/_/N-13820+4294959514

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:media / reader by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tho one format i tried had the "feature" of auto-installing the required driver on first insertion.

      Was this a sony format by any chance?

    4. Re:media / reader by Psicopatico · · Score: 1

      I consider USB dongles good candidates for this replacement.

      Price per unit is the only remaining hurdle.
      With really a few bucks you can get a one or two GB stick. Now compare that with the few cents per floppy.
      Yes price per GB is an easy win against a 720KB device, but if you want to fully replace floppies you need to spread its usage to the masses in huge quantities, by reducing the purchase cost gap.
      That way people wouldn't care about getting a ten pack of dongles at once and giving away some of them to friends like we did with the floppies.

      Taking into account the longevity and the robustness of a bunch of memories vs a spinning disk is also a worthy bonus.

      --
      Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
    5. Re:media / reader by stms · · Score: 1

      CD-RW?

    6. Re:media / reader by evilviper · · Score: 1

      To be fair, e-mail is the replacement for the floppy. 20MB e-mails are no big deal these days, and everybody has an e-mail address.

      USB and Optical serves an important purpose, but one that floppies NEVER filled... We've had CD-ROMs nearly as long as we've had 3.5" floppies...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:media / reader by evilviper · · Score: 1

      I don't believe 2.5" floppies were EVER $10, EACH...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:media / reader by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would love to see these go into production

      http://www.artlebedev.com/everything/flashkus/

  11. Sony botched it. by guytoronto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I worked in the radio industry from 2003-2005. MiniDisc was huge then. Unfortunately, Sony in all their "stop piracy" wisdom made it almost impossible to transfer digital content OFF a disc. It was easy enough to record digital content onto the disc (I would hook it up to digital out on my cable box, and record hours of music), but if you wanted to transfer off the disc, you had to do it via the analogue headphone port, or you need a specialized high-end deck.

    That was the most frustrating part of the MiniDisc format. My $300 MD player/recorder was crippled. It would have been nice to record an event (plugged into the board at a wedding), and then dump the audio to my computer for editing. But nooooo....Sony didn't want to give me that flexibility.

    1. Re:Sony botched it. by Elbart · · Score: 1

      And even if this feature had been available, SonicStage would have driven you insane anyway.

    2. Re:Sony botched it. by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      That is interesting: I have a Sony Minydisk dEck of that wintage (2003) and it has a fibre digital out port. Though things might have changed immediately after this deck was released.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    3. Re:Sony botched it. by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Yea, around the netMD/MDHD time the only devices that could do quick extraction of the audio was professional-market products.

      Reminds me of some plug system i read about that one would only find on similar such products today for handling digital video.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    4. Re:Sony botched it. by BancBoy · · Score: 1

      ... but if you wanted to transfer off the disc, you had to do it via the analogue headphone port, or you need a specialized high-end deck

      I wouldn't call the many SCMS "busting" boxes that you deployed along the SPDIF line to "disable" SCMS, a high end deck.

      The cost of a consumer MD deck plus a SCMS box was far far cheaper than the professional MD Decks that basically had that SCMS disabling functionality as a feature.

      --
      [UID-HeinzIntel]
    5. Re:Sony botched it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you would settle for real time transfer, you just needed an SPDIF device that ignored SCMS in order to get the audio off... For a computer, there were sound cards that qualified.

    6. Re:Sony botched it. by Deb-fanboy · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, Sony in all their "stop piracy" wisdom made it almost impossible to transfer digital content OFF a disc.

      That was the problem I had with the format. The only reason that I bought the unit is was for quick recording in the field, mainly for my wife's work. It would have been handy for her to be able to record hour long interviews and then transfer them to our computer for editing down to an interesting 10 minutes or so. However having to import the recordings through the the analogue input made the unit a real hassle to use.

      I sent some query emails to Sony because I was sure that this must be a mistake, why would a company make the process of using their device so awkward? Eventually I got a reply from Sony asking me why I wanted to circumvent their proprietary system, as if I was trying to break into their property!

      I have never bought anything from Sony since.

    7. Re:Sony botched it. by adolf · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      A Zoltrix Nightingale sound card with an optional optical IO module (about $25 for the set, a decade or so ago) worked fine as an SCMS stripper. It really was a lousy analog sound card, but it did a good job of handling S/PDIF accurately, and had a hardware digital loopback function which specifically supported SCMS stripping.

      There were a few other CMI 8738-based cards back then which could behave similarly.

      But it really wasn't so important, anyway: You always get generational loss when treating Minidisc players as standalone audio devices, whether connected with S/PDIF or analog. Making bit-accurate copies with MD gear is fail.

    8. Re:Sony botched it. by helbent · · Score: 1

      "That was the most frustrating part of the MiniDisc format. My $300 MD player/recorder was crippled."

      I recall reading a sad article online somewhere about a guy who had recorded his brother's wedding on a minidisc camcorder of some sort, only to discover to his horror that there was no easy way to make copies of the video directly. Sony's shitty cripple-tech meant that the camcorder assumed that any video you recorded with it was (a) copyrighted, and (b) you did not own the copyright, therefore you were simply SoL if you needed a backup.

      Any, the joys so Sony and their vibrant innovations, eh?

    9. Re:Sony botched it. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This is not even close to true. A friend of mine has owned two portable units, one Sony and one Aiwa, with optical digital inputs AND outputs. IIRC one of them even had multimode connectors that were also coaxial. Both were in about the middle of the price range for CONSUMER devices; neither was sold for professional use. Digital outputs on Minidisc players were ubiquitous in the first generation, and only dropped off as an always-included feature later on as a cost reduction strategy.

      The most frustrating thing about a minidisc is that the audio is compressed and lossy and you can't get the audio out of the unit without letting the unit decompress it, and even if you could, what would you do with ATRAC audio?

      If you had spent your $300 on another unit, or even spent only $200 of it on a used unit, you would have had digital output. My buddy who had all the MD stuff (had a home deck and two portables) did not spend more than $300 on any of the units he owned. Since then I've seen a Sony home deck with digital output at the flea for $50 but I literally have never seen an audio minidisc outside of this one friend's possession.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  12. UH... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sony sucks?
    (This is Slashdot after all...maybe we can fit in something about "nano" whatzits too...)

  13. Incompatible with what? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 2

    It was 1991, dummy. mp3 came around in 1993.

    MiniDisc was the only game in town and there was nothing wrong with creating ATRAC when there was nothing else out there.

    Besides, it didn't matter that it used ATRAC because it only output and input PCM data, just like a CD player or DAT recorder did. It only input and output 32Khz PCM audio in real-time. There was no USB and transferring 200MB (the size of a MiniDisc) over serial was impractical.

    SCMS (the copy protection) was annoying, but it was put on because of the labels, Sony didn't want to limit their product. But their previous product, DAT was driven off the market by the music labels, so if they wanted their new venture to succeed they had to do something for the labels. It was trivial to strip.

    Sony continuing to use ATRAC for music once storage-based players came around that you loaded by copying files was dumb. They should have noticed it was hurting their products' viability a lot earlier.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:Incompatible with what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ATRAC later gained a superior (in my opinion) lossless format. You could rip a CD to lossless ATRAC, and then transfer a lossy version to your portable ATRAC player, no recoding required. I wish their was a way to do this with mp3, FLAC, or even Apple's lossless format.

    2. Re:Incompatible with what? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      The Mini discman I had would have been PERFECTLY capable of laying down MP3s to MD, but Sony was stupid and insisted everything be converted to ATRAC. This was in 2002.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Incompatible with what? by willoughby · · Score: 1

      SCMS (the copy protection) was annoying, but it was put on because of the labels, Sony didn't want to limit their product.

      How times have changed. "Limiting their product" sure doesn't bother them now.

    4. Re:Incompatible with what? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

      Because if you put an mp3 on your MiniDisc, the player couldn't play it, just as if you put an ATRAC file on your mp3 player. So no, it wasn't PERFECTLY capable of laying down mp3s to MD.

      In 2002, you probably should have gotten an mp3 player instead of a MiniDisc player.

      --
      http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    5. Re:Incompatible with what? by plover · · Score: 1

      Did I say what formats they should have been compatible with, like MP3? Did I not say proprietary? Did I say anything about the timelines? And you call me "dummy"? Nice uncalled-for ad hominem.

      Besides, you're the one who's claiming Sony didn't want to limit their product. Sony has had a resolute and unyielding drive to limit their products ever since they bought Columbia Records in '87 and Columbia Pictures in '89. They are the industry leaders in DRM technologies, from SecuROM, MagicGate and SDMI, CSS, AACS, NTSC/C, and HDCP, just to name a few of their initiatives. They've been a force for evil and incompatibility for 24 years. So don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.

      --
      John
    6. Re:Incompatible with what? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      SCMS (the copy protection) was annoying, but it was put on because of the labels, Sony didn't want to limit their product.

      Sony is also a label :)

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    7. Re:Incompatible with what? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Just shut your pie hole. And for your information I had already had already owned a 64 MB MP3 player that was expensive as hell and had already died. MiniDisc looked like an economical way to have ALOT of music. It wasnt until after the purchase you find out EVERYTHING had to be converted. At the time of purchase it honestly never occurred to me I would have to convert to Sony's proprietary system. They did their best to make it look like it would hold MP3s on the packaging. Until that time Sony was loved and was a point of pride to have a nice Sony TV/equipment.

      --
      Good-bye
    8. Re:Incompatible with what? by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

      It was 1991, dummy. mp3 came around in 1993.

      Real-time MP3 playback did not come into fruition until late 1995, and it only started to get very popular when 1997 rolled around. The Diamond Rio portable MP3 player came out in late 1998. Also, MP3 encoding was a heavy work in progress in '93. It only started to sound relatively passable when l3enc matured in 1997.

    9. Re:Incompatible with what? by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      In 2002, you probably should have gotten an mp3 player instead of a MiniDisc player.

      In 2002 you should have bought stock in Apple.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    10. Re:Incompatible with what? by fusiongyro · · Score: 1

      I got an MD player in 1999, and there was zero confusion over whether or not it would take MP3s or hook up to your computer. The answer was no. NetMD came out in 2001 and purportedly let you transfer music from your computer to your MD player. I never wanted one in particular, because the software was Windows-only and I ran Linux exclusively back then. I could see the confusion, but I thought they were pretty up-front about MD being ATRAC-only, because they thought ATRAC was a really rad format. I don't really know enough about it to have an educated opinion, but I remember on some of the MD forums people would talk about what CDs they had that produced artifacts when compressed to ATRAC, and there were really only a handful of good examples.

    11. Re:Incompatible with what? by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      SCMS (the copy protection) was annoying, but it was put on because of the labels, Sony didn't want to limit their product.

      In fact, SCMS is required by law, via the Audio Home Recording Act.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    12. Re:Incompatible with what? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      But it wasn't at that time. Or wasn't much, if at all.

      Sony was the company behind the famous Betamax decision, remember? Until they became a content "owner", they were a friend of The People.

      But when they did become a content company, they did a complete about-face on the issue, which just goes to show that they are motivated by profit to the exclusion of ethics.

    13. Re:Incompatible with what? by mlts · · Score: 1

      With the Sony Network Walkman players, it was the same thing. The first generation which used a Magic Gate Memory Stick required transcoding. The second generation wrapped the MP3 format with encryption.

      Even more annoying was the fact that you couldn't copy music to it; you checked it out. If you formatted the player and didn't check the music back in, there was a high chance that you would have to re-scan/re-buy the tracks, as some Network Walkman players would check back in erased tracks, others wouldn't.

      Because of the in-your-face and annoying DRM, Sony in effect ceded the MP3 player market to Apple, which in later iPod releases had FairPlay DRM, but it would not be as annoying constantly as the old OpenMG software.

    14. Re:Incompatible with what? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      But it wasn't at that time. Or wasn't much, if at all.

      I assure you, I, the Sony Pictures employee, am quite aware of the history. Sony bought Columbia and formed Sony Pictures Studios under Peters and Guber in 1989, and bought CBS Records in 1987, years before the MiniDisc was developed; Sony had had join interests with CBS records as far back as the mid-1960s and manufactured the first CD releases in the US for CBS. CBS had Michael Jackson, Streisand, and a broad repertoire of country acts through the 60s to the Sony buyout.

      Sony didn't buy the content companies for synergy as much as they bought them for the pure reason that there was a stupendous equity bubble in Japan and the only place where Japanese companies could find affordable properties was in the US. Both purchases at the time were widely understood to be "muggings" of Sony: the Americans (Coca-Cola and CBS pre-Westinghouse, respectively) wanted to cash out at the top of a market, and conned Sony execs into buying these American assets at hilariously inflated prices. Sony paid over $7 billion for both entities, paid hundred of millions of dollars to Peters and Guber and Michael Jackson in order to secure their busines.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    15. Re:Incompatible with what? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Sorry, just to complete the thought: Sony won the Betamax decision, but it didn't help Betamax a whit, because it wasn't positioned for adoption, due to the exact problems MiniDisk would have a decade later -- a closed format, with high barriers to entry and difficult technical limitations. Sony Electronics has always tried to sell integrated products as far down the value chain as physically possible, that's been a part of their strategy as far back as their radios in the 50s, and it's part of their consumer strategy, their pro electronics strategy, their software, up and down, left and right. This is why they use proprietary gozintas, it's a part of their culture and the way they choose to address their markets, and they've done it LONG before they owned content companies. (I should say that this strategy fails sometimes but works some others, its completely valid in certain kinds of environments, home music just isn't one of them at this time.)

      Sony thought it had opened up a new use for Beta machines from the Betamax decision, but not because they thought people had the right to time-shift shows, but because they thought people had the right to time-shift shows with Betamax machines. If they could have carved out a judgement that permitted them to own timeshifting and labeled JVC VCRs as Pircay Machines, they would have done it in an instant.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    16. Re:Incompatible with what? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Erh... I don't get it. They didn't want to limit their product by limiting its usefulness?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    17. Re:Incompatible with what? by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 1

      Recent versions of iTunes (which I assume you use since you said you wish you could do that with Apple Lossless) can automaticalle transcode content to 128 kbps when copying it to an iPod.

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    18. Re:Incompatible with what? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Sony won the Betamax decision, but it didn't help Betamax a whit"

      My issue wasn't whether it helped Sony, a little or a lot. What I was getting at is that Sony has proven that it will take whatever legal position in the courts that best serve its bottom line, ethics bedamned, even if it has to completely reverse its position from one year to another.

      Can Sony say "hypocrite"? Sure. I knew they could.

    19. Re:Incompatible with what? by beckett · · Score: 1

      Sony has had a resolute and unyielding drive to limit their products ever since they bought Columbia Records in '87 and Columbia Pictures in '89.

      I wish that were the case: if Sony really had limited their products, we would have been spared Mariah Carey in the 90s.

  14. 8-track was hardly "fresh in the mind" by 91degrees · · Score: 2

    It was very much a 50's format. Hardly anyone had bought one for a decade. The format was losing popularity by the end of the 1970's. Even Vinyl outlasted the format.

    Compact cassette was still fresh in the mind, and minidisc was seen as a replacement recordable medium - a benefit not provided by CD.

    1. Re:8-track was hardly "fresh in the mind" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8-track wasn't even invented until the 1960's. It became very popular in the 70's, then disappeared in the late 80's. I assume you are too young to have lived through all this; your dates are all wrong. The end of 8-tracks was pretty close to the MD intro.

    2. Re:8-track was hardly "fresh in the mind" by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      I'm old enough to have seen the introduction of CD. Never seen an 8-track in a shop. Unless it was just an American thing. But according to Wikipedia, 8-track was on the way out by 1982 and was completely dead by 1988.

    3. Re:8-track was hardly "fresh in the mind" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8-track was a 60's format, it was developed until 1964. But it did loose its popularity by the end of the 70's. I never had many of them but they did not last long eventually getting tangled up and disposed of.

  15. Sony ruins everything by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sony is a company that cannot balance its products and services against its media and publishing. It is torn between offering innovative products and services and keeping media and publishing happy. Microsoft attempted to please media and publishing interests and Vista was the result. Microsoft saw the error in this but Sony cannot simply because it is too entrenched in those interests because it embodies those interests.

    In general, I think it can be shown that media and publishing interests will never EVER be satisfied. The more they are given, the more they want and we all know inherently, there is no limit to greed. We see this in music, video and game entertainment industries all over. We all bemoan the changes they keep imposing but we, the consumer, are unable to influence their changes enough. Ideally, we vote with our dollars, but in reality, when we do, they arrive at the wrong conclusions and blame "piracy" and crap like that.

    1. Re:Sony ruins everything by hitmark · · Score: 2

      The IP sector is based on rent seeking on non-rivalrous goods. This means that they can rent something out to a infinite number of customers at the same time. A bit like a apartment building with infinite capacity. But with infinite capacity it also means that anyone could find a place there, and the price of housing is based on scarcity and need. So they need to keep a sharp watch on all entryways so nobody on the inside allows anyone on the outside in.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:Sony ruins everything by spire3661 · · Score: 1, Informative

      Microsoft certainly did NOT see the error. The same HDMI handshake bullshit that was in Vista is in Win7. GO ahead and play a DVD on Win 7 without a full HDMI path and watch Win 7 purposefully output a blocky picture. Microsoft also fucked with the audio mixing so it makes it alot harder to mix streams (to appease the RIAA which also breaks games like Bioshock and CoD4 that cant be launched without a mic attached now.)

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Sony ruins everything by hjf · · Score: 1

      I think Sony, as most japanese companies, works exclusively for the Japanese market. They see the "rest of the world" ass "less than relevant". Sony is big. Really really big in Japan. But so are other companies you know about but don't usually see in other markets (Mitsubishi for TVs come to mind). And the japanese public seems to be happy enough with what Sony offers them (or maybe they design their products based on Japanese tastes).

      And I know it's pretty much all over the spectrum of japanese products. At the early days of BD-R you could only get BD-R DL in Japan. Sony made them, but sold them only there - the rest of the world had to work with BD-R or grey-market Japanese-labeled BD-R DLs.
      I run a comic book store, and book editors are always complaining about rights management for japanese series. Some japanese companies are simply not interested in licensing manga comics outside japan. It's not a money issue either (foreign publishers are willing to pay), they see that 90% of manga is consumed in japan and only the remaining 10% is sold outside. Maybe the numbers are similar for electronic products?

      There is an amazing number of Sony products used in pro-land. U-Matic/Betacam decks, cameras, etc. Sony makes basically everything a TV studio needs for broadcast - and I'm pretty sure in Japan there are companies that are exclusively sony. But outside japan you see a mix of Canon, Sony, and "other brands you've never heard about". I was amazed to see a HUGE projector from Sony that's exclusively sold in Japan. The optics were out of this world. The front element was 15CM in diameter or larger, and the whole thing was about the size of a 20" CRT TV. But these are available internationally only as grey-market imports.

      Maybe Sony, simply doesn't see a relevant market outside Japan and that's why *we* non japanese people think Sony formats are dead. But they're doing just fine in the land of the rising sun. I wouldn't be surprised if you could walk into some Akiba store and find brand new Beta tapes for sale.

  16. Sorry, 32KHz, 44.1KHz or 48Khz audio by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    It did it over S/PDIF (usually optical).

    I left two of those off.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  17. Wasted opportunity for Sony by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When Minidisc was announced I thought it would be a perfect removable storage solution; at the time people were using Syquest drives for "large" (44 and 88 MB) removable storage, and they were pricy; there was a market waiting for something cheaper yet still reasonably fast. I think a Minidisc could hold 250MB or something like that - good storage at the time, relatively cheap, and would probably have been pretty reliable.

    However, Sony's anti-piracy worries made Minidisc inaccessible digitally - there were no Minidisc readers/writers and you could only use it for recording/playback of ANALOG audio!

    Soon Iomega came out with the very popular 100MB ZIP drives and Sony's window of opportunity closed - and we got to enjoy crappy Iomega quality and the infamous "Click-of Death".

    Sony does come out with cool tech sometimes, but their entertainment division screws it up every time. I guess Sony made their money from Minidisc, but they could have done so much more with it.

    --
    We apologize for the inconvenience.
    1. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by master811 · · Score: 1

      When Minidisc was announced I thought it would be a perfect removable storage solution; at the time people were using Syquest drives for "large" (44 and 88 MB) removable storage, and they were pricy; there was a market waiting for something cheaper yet still reasonably fast. I think a Minidisc could hold 250MB or something like that - good storage at the time, relatively cheap, and would probably have been pretty reliable.

      However, Sony's anti-piracy worries made Minidisc inaccessible digitally - there were no Minidisc readers/writers and you could only use it for recording/playback of ANALOG audio!

      Soon Iomega came out with the very popular 100MB ZIP drives and Sony's window of opportunity closed - and we got to enjoy crappy Iomega quality and the infamous "Click-of Death".

      Sony does come out with cool tech sometimes, but their entertainment division screws it up every time. I guess Sony made their money from Minidisc, but they could have done so much more with it.

      That's wrong. I still have my old MD player which could also record from a Digital Optical out on any CD player via Toslink cable.

    2. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      Very few models could do that , and it wasnt until much later in the game, long after Iomega came onto the scene.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      You couldn't do data via MiniDisc in any reasonable fashion, but you could certainly do digital audio.

    4. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      All that Sony has left is the glory of the past. They're still culturally traumatized by the Betamax ruling and losing to VHS. They tried to bribe their other crippled child bluray to dominance but have failed again. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    5. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by drwtsn32 · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. I had the very first portable MD recorder and it had digital optical in/out. It was a feature on almost all portable units, and actually became less common in recent years when NetMD hit the scene.

    6. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Really? Because every model I ever owned was portable, from Sony and Sharp, and they ALL accepted TOSLINK-in.

    7. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Sony produced PCMCIA-connected MiniDisc data read/write devices but never sold them outside of Japan.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      That's why I said "... in any reasonable fashion". For anyone who's curious, look here at the MDH-10 and MDM-111, both of which also required special MD-DATA discs and couldn't record audio.

    9. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, your correction is incorrect. The point was that you could not get music or data off most MD devices Digitally. I own 2 MD devices. They love to record (make captive) your digital audio, but they would not play nice and share with others. Amusingly, you could pirate onto MD all you want my circa 2001 devices didn't check for any flags. You could not use a digital out from the MD to other devices. (This relates to most consumer level products, there were exceptions)

      So, Sony did make sure you could not copy the songs to others, but it totally ruined its usefulness. If you didn't want to buy lots and lots of MD discs, you needed to keep MP3s or CDs of your music so you could burn fresh copies to make a mix disc. At the time, many of us enjoyed its storage size and recording capability, but locking down digital out made it useless for most consumers. Pirates would buy the needed readers to transfer their bootlegs, but most of us didn't.

      It is worth noting that on 2001-2002, MP3 players were either very expensive, very limited, or both. That is why I went with MD to replace my D-5 CD walkman.

    10. Re:Wasted opportunity for Sony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The very first model released in the 'States had both optical in and out. They shared the same plug as the analog connectors, but you could buy a cable that was shaped like a 1/8 mini plug, but was plastic with an optical fiber exposed at the tip. I know, I've got one.

      It wasn't until later, when the cheaper models started coming out, that they stopped putting optical on them.

  18. Killed by the mp3 player by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 1

    I had a minidisc player in college that I purchased for two reasons. One, you could hold a few albums' worth of cds on a single disc, so you could carry around a larger library, and the ability to fast forward from track to track made it a lot more convenient than cassette recorders for putting together mixtapes but having the ability to skip and rewind songs. Those features were quickly overtaken by mp3 players, with even more accessibility.

    The second reason I liked the minidisc was that it had a mic input. I carried around a small microphone, and I occasionally recorded bits of shows, or I recorded ambience to use in little sound projects that I had. Today I have an iPod touch with a built-in mic, which is plenty adequate for recording those bits of audio in the real world that I want to hang onto. However, the iPod doesn't have a mic input, so I can't stick in a better mic and record something at a higher quality. But that one feature isn't really enough for most people to still want to carry around a disk of physical memory. Maybe someday I'll break out that little recorder for field recording again.

    --
    Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
    1. Re:Killed by the mp3 player by Andreas+Mayer · · Score: 1

      Today I have an iPod touch with a built-in mic, which is plenty adequate for recording those bits of audio in the real world that I want to hang onto. However, the iPod doesn't have a mic input, so I can't stick in a better mic and record something at a higher quality.

      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ipod+touch+mic

    2. Re:Killed by the mp3 player by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Actually, your iPod touch does have a mic input, that extra metal band on the headphone jack. It's how I use my G3 Ipod touch for skype, since it lacks the internal microphone. There's a tiny little microphone built into the wire of the original equipment headphone that comes with the iPod. That built in mic is the only thing that justifies the high price of the Apple brand original equipment earbuds that you can buy for a pricey $30.

    3. Re:Killed by the mp3 player by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 1

      Well shit, I consider myself enlightened.

      --
      Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
    4. Re:Killed by the mp3 player by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I still haven't sourced a bare solder-tail version of the 4-conductor 3.5mm plug, yet. I've grabbed a few audio/video out cables from other devices that should work. I am surprised that I haven't been able to find any kind of breakout connector yet that turns the headphone/mic jack on the iPod into line in/out connections.

  19. How old are you submitter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Minidisc was released to market in 1992, cds we're already on the market for multiple years at the time and 8tracks hadn't been around in over 20 years. Oh wait timothy submitted this, we're lucky it makes any grammatical sense, being factual would just be icing on the cake.

  20. Ahhh memories by defcon-11 · · Score: 1

    I remember downloading .mp3s from Audio Galaxy over my dial up connection at 15 minutes per song, and then recording them to my portable MiniDisc player via a sound card with a digital optical cable port back in '97 or '98. Good times. I tried to listen to some of them a couple of years ago, but the format must not be very stable, cause the discs were all dead.

  21. yes, you mentioned timelines... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 2

    You mentioned a timeline when you said:

    'When they were released,'

    That's 1991, before mp3. Let's set you didn't mean mp3, what else did you mean in 1991? There was no other digital formats except CD and DAT and MiniDisc was compatible with them because it used S/PDIF as input and output. You set a timeline to 1991 and then complain about things that don't make sense in 1991.

    Proprietary doesn't mean anything in this context. Secure Digital is proprietary too, it's just widely adopted. Probably the SD Card Association was more reasonable on pricing than Sony when it comes to licensing fees. And SD took off.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital#Openness_of_standards

    'MagicGate'

    MagicGate is no different than the "Secure" part of Secure Digital. Device makers can use it to write content in such a way that it can only be read back on that device.

    HDCP is Intel, not Sony.

    I'm not sure where SDMI came from I can't find any info that says Sony was behind it.

    A lot better things than MiniDisc came out later, but in 1991, it was the best thing going. Sony stupid kept trying to ride that instead of jumping into the new business of mp3 players and they paid the price for it.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:yes, you mentioned timelines... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      What people have been glossing over -- mostly just leaving out, actually -- was the influence the "recording industry" in the USA had on the MiniDisc. It was the first technology that the content companies actually managed to suppress.

      They tried it with cassettes (they didn't like the fact that you could easily record your own music) but didn't get very far. They made a half-hearted attempt at blocking CDs, because of their "perfect" content (meaning that pirates -- real pirates, that is, according to the definition: people who made bootleg copies and sold them -- could make as many perfect copies as they wanted). But they didn't try very hard because CDs were hard to copy. Then, news of the MiniDisc came out of Japan. The music industry lobbied hard over this one, with the result that the MiniDisc could not be imported into the United States unless and until an "acceptable" DRM scheme was implemented. (There was no such requirement in Japan.)

      People seem to be forgetting that MiniDiscs were not widely available here until that DRM scheme was put in place... nearly 10 years after the MiniDisc had been available on the street in Japan. Why did it take so long? Because the hardware makers were not interested in spending the money to develop and implement the necessary hardware DRM. And consumers showed very little interest in a DRM-laden recording device.

      It did get done, eventually... but it wasn't very long afterward that MP3 players, expensive as they were, became available and made the point somewhat moot.

      The MiniDisc was, in fact, an example of the music industry killing off a technology -- or nearly so -- in order to prevent recording of "their" songs.

  22. Good riddance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God, ATRAC sounded awful. A guy at work had an ATRAC3 device. We took one of my CDs and recorded a song. I took about three seconds to hear the obvious artifacts. It had the worst temporal stepping of decaying sounds I have ever heard.

    1. Re:Good riddance! by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      cool story bro

    2. Re:Good riddance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ATRAC3 != ATRAC.

  23. The minidisc remotes by moreati · · Score: 1

    What I miss most from my old MZ-R35, is the headphone remote. By modern standards it was large, with more controls than an iPod Shuffle, but everything was usable one handed by touch alone. The rewind/seek controls were a twist cap. I had a half hearted go at adapting one, but it would take more SMD fu than I can muster.

    So long Mini-Disc

    1. Re:The minidisc remotes by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 1

      The remotes Sony used were fantastic. I can remember back in the mid 90's looking at my (relatively) bluky MZ-R50 and the slender tube of a remote and thinking aloud to my mates that "one day this remote you see here will be the media player itself". Now, they're even smaller than that.

      The controls on the remote were fantastic as you say - one button on the very end and the twisting collar around it. Sony had a similar remote for car audio systems that would mount on the steering column too.

      The remote is pretty simple in it's communication with the headunit - rather than anything fancy and digital, it used resistors of differing values to represent the different controls on the remote. You could even get a 24k resistor and short out the control pins on the headphone jack, toggle the hold switch on and off and you'd put the unit in service mode. The two useful things you could do in service mode were disable SCMS (until you power-cycle the unit or eject the current disc) and read the current temperature.

      There was a lot less logic required to read the different resistor values than there would be for it to have a proper digital interface, you could probably interface it relatively easily with an Arduino or something similar these days...

  24. Matrix movie prop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the Matrix, when Neo is selling digital drugs to the couple at his apartment door, the delivery device was a Sony mini disc. The mini discs were hidden inside the hollowed out Simulacra & Simulation book.

  25. Old recordings by grumling · · Score: 1

    I had a MD player back when I was impersonating a gym rat. Kind of a pain to use, but more convenient than a cassette or CD Walkman. I liked that it ran on a single AA battery for a few hours and had a digital optical input. I think it was less than $100, but the discs were expensive and hard to find.

    A few years later I got into operating portable satellite ham radio. Most people record their QSOs because things happen too quickly to log contacts. The MD was easy to interface with my radio, had a way to mark important spots on the recording with one button, and fit in a pocket.

    So it WAS a useful format for some things, but basically had no purpose once mp3 players and digital recorders came on the market. Now a cell phone held next to the speaker of my radio works good enough for logging, and if I want better quality a cheap Olympus digital recorder will perform as well as the MD recorder.

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
  26. Great tool for journalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Minidisc was a terrific cassette replacement for radio reporters. I used consumer (not pro) units during a stint in Eastern Europe in the late 90s, including covering the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Much better audio quality (no tape hiss), and the MD Walkman recorders weighed a fraction of the Sony cassette recorders most of us used. Plus, there were usability features like track-marking and time stamps and long-duration recordings that were a vast improvement over analog cassettes.

    Pro hardware was extensively used in radio studios as a replacement for tape carts, which were cousins of the 8-track, and were widely used for playing commercials, jingles, PSAs, and singles back in the top-40 era. The radio network where I used to work still has MD recorders in many if not most of their studios. I used to use them to record a backup copy of telephone interviews, which were recorded to a server somewhere for editing. Having the MD backup saved my tuchus on more than one occasion.

    1. Re:Great tool for journalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too used MD in broadcasting, The classic MZ-R5ST deck, with it's fine edit capability and the AIWA AM-F70/80 seies were quite handy and allowed playback of tracks in any order -- kind of the precursor to what you can do today with an Iphone or Ipad and good audio software. I still have the MZ-1-- the very first MD. It was built like a tank, though it had reliability issues. Discs will probably be available on Ebay forever, and some are probably orbiting the Earth. One of the great early digital technologies.

  27. Betamax... by itsdapead · · Score: 1

    CDs were still a recent comer, and 8-track was fresh in the mind.

    More to the point, VHS vs. Betamax was still fresh in the mind. I seem to recall that DCC, DAT and Minidisc all popped up at around the same time (plus, digital audio recording had been one of the selling points of Video 8 before it got sidelined into camcorders) and it was clear that one or two of them would fail. Maybe people just decided to sit on their money and see who won the war. Turned out, none of them really did (although it was only DCC that, deservedly, sunk without trace).

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  28. so long minidsic, too bad sony invented you by steak · · Score: 1

    seriously if sony had jumped on dvd type discs and had mp3 compatibility earlier I don't think the ipod would have taken over so quickly.

  29. CD-R is topo cheap to reuse by itsdapead · · Score: 1

    There are ways to format optical RW media to behave like floppies

    Thing is, CD-R is so cheap, ~10c per GB, that it doesn't really matter that they are single-use (not very green, but I suspect that Gaia has bigger fish to fry). Apart from the issues with packet-writing, RW discs have always been sufficiently more expensive to ensure that it made economical sense to use write-once discs.

    It always seems sacrilege, but I suppose those of us who were around in the 80s have registered CDs as objects of value, and haven't really registered the fact that they're now cheaper than floppies ever were, and that's before allowing for inflation and taking into account the 1000x capacity increase.

    Glad i am not the only one. I still would love to see cheap 5x-10x packs of small usb sticks or similar.

    Yeah. They seem to have bottomed out at several bucks a pop... OK for giving away to customers/contacts where you might get some "intangible" payback, but not really hand-out-without-thinking material. They could do cheap plastic ones with no metal shroud, just contacts (I had some double-ended SD cards like that that could plug into a SD slot or a USB port, but they were 1G, which was quite big at the time, not cheap enough to be disposable).

    For give-away media, CD-R is still king.

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    1. Re:CD-R is topo cheap to reuse by hitmark · · Score: 1

      i found myself reminded of this concept:
      http://www.ubergizmo.com/2011/02/art-lebedev-cardboard-usb-flash-drives-concept/

      Also, i think Windows have had built in ability to write cd-r since XP. Tho this is a easy to overlook feature as it involves dropping files onto a "empty" optical drive.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:CD-R is topo cheap to reuse by evilviper · · Score: 1

      CD-Rs are cheap, but the use-case is a PITA. You can't just drag and drop files, rename them, modify folder structure, add more files, delete some files, etc, etc. Multisession support was always iffy, both on the writing-software side, and on the reading OS.

      As for USB sticks, removing the 1 cent worth of metal doesn't make it any cheaper... In fact "slim" USB thumb-drives tend to be more expensive. The casing costs, what, 10 cents? The electronics inside is where the cost lies, and often, spending a few cents more on a bigger, stronger case allows the expensive innards to get a bit cheaper.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:CD-R is topo cheap to reuse by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      CD-Rs are cheap, but the use-case is a PITA. You can't just drag and drop files, rename them, modify folder structure, add more files, delete some files, etc, etc. Multisession support was always iffy, both on the writing-software side, and on the reading OS.

      I haven't had problems with multisession support since DOS. I do drag and drop files, rename them, add more files, delete some files, etc etc, but you can't modify folder structure. Who cares? Who ever needs to do THAT? (I've only deleted files and such when messing with an unattended windows install disc.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  30. non drm by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I had one, and copied plenty of ripped and downloaded music to mine without any problem at all. It had surprising battery life, decent play time on a disk, overall a nice device. The home unit i had worked well for a long time.

    I never did try to buy music on native disks, partially for the reasons you mentioned, but also due to lack of selection.

    They could still compete well with the early MP3 players, but once the ipod came out, you could see the handwriting on the wall and it was just a matter of time.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  31. Oh noooo! by twoears · · Score: 1

    Bring back the Elcaset!

  32. A Rare Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MiniDisc is a rare example where the mainstream mostly seemed to understand that something is garbage precisely because it's proprietary. Very few implementations, zero competition, needlessly overpriced at every point from the hardware to the media, realization that someday the media simply won't be available at any price -- people understood, with features and performance being secondary concerns. They don't generalize, but with miniDisc, they "got it."

    Of course, there were enough people who didn't get it, that it still lasted a couple decades. This doesn't serve as a lesson to Sony or companies like them that they can't make money buy selling crap, but I think it really does mean that sometimes, products dedicated to lockin will be doomed to have insignificant share.

    1. Re:A Rare Example by Voyager529 · · Score: 2

      I think there was more to it than that. First and foremost, the media was extremely expensive. Second, there was no real bundling anywhere - few if any car stereos had them built in, nor did stereo minisystems, and no desktops or laptops could use them outside of the player (if you don't believe this is important, do you know anyone who's burnt an audio CD within the past decade? any of those people burn 'em on a standalone CD deck?). Third, the expensive media and players never paid off as being anything except a digital audio player - no data, no digital cameras, no video games. Costly and cost effective are two different things. Minidisc had the former down to a science.

      Yes, while that largely reiterates what you stated above, I don't think it was that the public understood that this was the case as much as the fact that going Minidisc required a conscious effort. Customers had to decide to buy a portable minidisc player, as well as a home stereo minidisc player, and then transfer all their CDs to that format. By contrast, by time one or two friends had a minidisc player in my circle, CD-RW drives were standard fare in desktops (and in all but the most bottom level laptops), cars and home stereos had CD players, portable CD players had a median price of $50-$60 (higher for the Sony and Panasonic ones, but Chinese no-names were easily $25). All we had to do was either buy CDs and play them, or buy blank media and...play them. At a quarter a pop, blank CDs didn't need the rewriteability that Minidisc had. It wasn't that consumers said "they're proprietary", they said "CD is everywhere, so switching is pointless".

  33. The MiniDisc wake by viracochas · · Score: 2

    I think there was a niche generation that really really got into MD in a big way. Here in Europe there was a pretty sizeable take-up of it but it was largely word of mouth. I got a portable recorder in '96, within a year about half a dozen of my friends had similar machines. Far smaller than a portable CD or cassette player with great rechargeable battery life. The discs were small enough you could pocket dozens of them for sharing and swapping.

    Over the years the portable players got smaller and smaller. After picking up a deck perfect album duplicates could be made, and with CD multichangers you could preprogram a 'mix tape' and let it run and record. My last portable player was my beloved Panasonic SJ-MJ70 which is one of the most beautiful electronic products ever put on this earth.

    This was all reasonably affordable. My deck was £100 as were all the portables in the local Richer Sounds. The discs got to be really cheap - under £1 per disc as the format got more popular. I had shoeboxes full of discs, hundreds of them. Never had one fail. Cloning the TOC could get an 80m disc from any 74m disc!

    Granted we were all into our music. When an album was £10 you didn't really want to carry it around or lend it out and MD was a great way to preserve the originals. The hardware costs are far more reasonable when you consider the lack of wear and tear on original media. I think the downfall of MD wasn't just the rise of the mp3 player but the movement away from the album format that came along with it. No longer would the MD be seen as one or two albums per disc, but more as a twenty song hard limit. When an mp3 player could take 100 albums and play anything in any order the argument for discrete chunks of music over different media was a losing one. Even though 128kbps mp3s didn't sound nearly as good as SD MD ATRAC it was mostly unnoticed.

    But in the 90s the use of MD as data storage would have been a revolution. It would have undercut the cost of Zip and Jazz drives hugely and was durable and consumer friendly. Had Sony not been so beholden to their entertainment division they would have cornered the removable media market.

    The format's lack of impact in the US tends to mute widespread online celebration of the format, but in some markets it did really well. In my class of '99 I would guess about 25% of people used it. Personally the death knell was when my new SACD player refused to do a digital output for me to make an MD copy. CDs were fine but not the few SACDs I'd invested in. Adios Sony and soon I was on a G2 iPod.

    I haven't even touched on studio use. But I remember fondly the days of a player in one pocket, bunch of albums in another, and meeting someone at a prearranged time (no mobile phones!).

  34. SD by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

    The flash memory format known as SD might as well be. Just make sure a reader/writter is installed everywhere, like most netbooks have. Multicard readers are very cheap and come in 3 1/2" size to use floppy slots.

    --
    Artix
    Your Linux, your init.
    1. Re:SD by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Wrong on many levels.

      What's the cheapest SD card you can find? $5? Far more expensive than a floppy disk.

      And the installed base isn't there. "Most netbooks" certainly don't have SD slots, though plenty do. Laptops don't, desktops don't, etc. You can't count on anyone having an SD card reader, so it's nothing like floppies.

      Right now it's divided into Optical (CD-R/DVD-R) for large read-only access, and USB thumb-drives for smaller, far more expensive, but read-write access.

      I'd love for optical discs to go away. Actually on-topic this time, the big problem with CDs and DVDs is their size, and unprotected nature. The form factor of MiniDiscs was superb. You could swap discs blindfolded, with one hand, in no time at all. There was no fragility at all, and I've never seen a single disc in ~100 die.

      When I just recently transferred as many CD-Rs to my computer, I found failure rates on good media (TDK) in the double-digits. What a nightmare. Of course I planned for such problems, and lost no data as a result, but the extra time consumed was astronomical. The world would look very differently if CDs were introduced exclusively with (compact) caddies, and about the same size as floppies.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:SD by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And the installed base isn't there. "Most netbooks" certainly don't have SD slots, though plenty do. Laptops don't, desktops don't, etc.

      Most netbooks certainly do have SD slots. Most laptops do today as well. And frankly, it's gotten pretty rare to buy a desktop from a major name without a multi-format memory card reader in it.

      The price is, however, a real issue.

      The floppy of today is the internet.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  35. MiniDisc requiem by optimism · · Score: 1

    Ah, MiniDisc. You may not be missed, but you will be remembered fondly.

    MD was by far the best option for musically-inclined travelers throughout the 1990s.

    Small, durable, shockproof, long battery life. You could dub lossless digital optical from a CD or another MD. The best players had inline remotes (with a little backlit LCD) that let you control & tweak every function without taking it out of your pocket.

    Sony invented the format, but Aiwa made the best portable units.

    I remember rocking up in Goa in the late 90's, where long-term visitors would post signs for their trance collections on MD.

    I remember many long ferry, train, and bus rides in southeast asia that would have been intolerable without my trusty MD player and a couple dozen discs in my backpack.

    Of course MD has been obsolete for a decade. And now I can get the same results from an app on my iPhone. But it was great during its time.

    R.I.P., MD.

  36. Sony = bastards by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    I had a minidisc recorder that had a software suite for loadng up tracks from CD etc. It also burnt CDs in ATRAC format for playback in their portable CD players. I burnt quite a few disks on the promise of better quality than MP3 and used this to master certain irreplacable tracks. Turns out, the DRM protection stops the disks being played on any other PC than the one they were recorded on. Didn't find that out until that PC was gone. Result, I've lost some very important recordings and it's yet another reason I now avoid Sony like the plague.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  37. Lossy Data Compression by David+Off · · Score: 0

    I don't know how much you value your backups but saving via a lossy compression seems like a recipe for problems.

  38. http://www.yutbuyprisebestsale.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.yutbuyprisebestsale.com/

    1. Re:http://www.yutbuyprisebestsale.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mizuno Power X G2 Batting Glove
       

      • Mizuno X-Flex stitching patterns provide optimal range of motion
      • Cabretta Tack leather palm for enhanced grip
      • Cabretta leather back for the ultimate feel
      • Compression molded neoprene wristband for comfort and feel
      • Reinforced palm pad for increased durability

      Buy best sale Mizuno Power X G2 Batting Glove in lowest Price, Oder Now!!

       

      Spalding 8375 EZ Court Marking System
       

      • Patented measuring device and three jumbo pieces of chalk to create a regulation court
      • Kit measures layout lane, free-throw line, and three-point arc
      • Sports chalk stands up to competitive play yet washes off with water
      • Includes NBA logo stencil
      • Sets up a court in minutes

      Buy best sale Spalding 8375 EZ Court Marking System in lowest Price, Oder Now!!

       

       

  39. sony's minidisc isn't gone ... yet! by seekertom · · Score: 1

    Maybe 10 years ago, wallyworld closed them out and I bought a handful of them for 50.00 us each. Then I picked up whatever discs I could and have been using them ever since. I don't usually use the full hi-md ability since I bought mostly the cheaper discs, but for the most part, I get hours of play off my mp3 downloads while I cut the grass, paint the house, whatever. I can't remember ever having a single failure with them. Not many things I have still work after 10 years of banging around like these guys. Ya, 1.5v AA batteries seem to last forever. I have seen many other data logging uses for them as well, and some folks even record bird calls in the field with them. We'll see how my Zune hd holds up as comparison. As for drm stuff, maybe the files I listen to aren't protected, but I have not had a problem dl from disc to my pc to edit the pile or re-copy to a different disc.

  40. Game over by stratocarter · · Score: 1

    Sad story!