Slashdot Mirror


Japan Will Make Its Last-Ever VCR This Month (mentalfloss.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Most of us stopped using video cassette recorders a very, very long time ago. By 2008, DVD had officially replaced VHS as the preferred home media format, and the glory days of the 1980s -- when VHS and Betamax battled it out to be the number-one choice for watching and recording movies and television at home -- were very much in the rear-view mirror. So it might surprise you to learn that VCRs are still being manufactured -- at least they were until this month. Funai Electric, the last remaining Japanese company to make the units, has announced that the company will cease production on its VCR units, due to declining sales and difficulty acquiring parts. Their VCRs are made in China and sold in many territories, including North America, under brand names like Sanyo, but last year's figures reported just 750,000 sales worldwide.

131 comments

  1. That's it! by Polarina · · Score: 1

    That's it! Time to buy a Betamax.

    1. Re:That's it! by operagost · · Score: 2

      PFFT! Betamax is old news. I'm banking on HD-DVD.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:That's it! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Betamax is gone too. You can still get Betacam...

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:That's it! by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

      Oh, please. It's all about LaserDisc now.

    4. Re:That's it! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Just checked... Now I'm not so sure. Google is very elusive about giving a direct answer.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:That's it! by jrmcferren · · Score: 1

      As of 2016 Sony has discontinued ALL 1/2 inch formats, this includes HDCAM and HDCAM SR which were the HD versions of Betacam (1440x1080 for HDCAM full 1920x1080 for HDCAM SR).

      --
      sudo mod me up
    6. Re:That's it! by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      RCA has the winner

      Capacitance Electronic Disc
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    7. Re:That's it! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, I remember this! Back when LaserDisc was starting to be a thing, RCA was trying to sell that needle-in-groove system for video. I was doing an internship at an engineering company at the time - I remember RCA's system provided a regular source of comedy material amongst the engineers.

      Of course in the end VHS tape (and later, DVD) ended up eating LaserDisc for lunch.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    8. Re:That's it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there's no shortage of beta software! (Beta = too cheap to debug before shipping, let our users test it.)

      I miss the days that there was software quality control and doing patches was hard.

    9. Re:That's it! by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Both of them were pretty klugey.

      I have a friend who still has a large collection of laser discs. It's rather fun listening to him come up with new ways to validate his purchases.

    10. Re:That's it! by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      VHS was never a competitor to LaserDisc. Even super-VHS had terrible video quality compared to LaserDisc, which was for people who would spend extra to have the best picture possible. LaserDisc died when better options came along with DVD, BluRay, and 1080p MKVs. LaserDisc became a low-quality format that could only present 500 lines of vertical resolution, but back in the bad old NTSC days, it was the best option available. It could compete with DVDs because there was no over-compression problem, but it could never compete with even 720p HDTV.

    11. Re:That's it! by narcc · · Score: 2

      If he's happy with them, what difference does it make?

    12. Re:That's it! by operagost · · Score: 1

      Exactly. As someone with a decent collection of vinyl, frankly the technical quality has little to do with it.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    13. Re: That's it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They still work is good enough.

    14. Re:That's it! by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      To me none. It seems important to him though.

    15. Re:That's it! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Given that VHS enjoyed wide (and durable) consumer adoption, while LaserDisc struggled to gain even a small foothold in the consumer market - I'd say a more accurate statement would be "LaserDisc was never a competitor to VHS".

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    16. Re:That's it! by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Just FYI - the link in your sig is dead.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    17. Re:That's it! by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      CLV, CAV or CAA? I don't want to buy the wrong thing

    18. Re:That's it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're drunk. I had both machines and S-VHS was superior to Laserdisc. LD had composite video only.

  2. What by sexconker · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Japan Will Make Its Last-Ever VCR This Month"
    "Funai Electric, the last remaining Japanese company to make the units, has announced that the company will cease production on its VCR units, due to declining sales and difficulty acquiring parts."
    "Their VCRs are made in China and sold in many territories, including North America, under brand names like Sanyo, but last year's figures reported just 750,000 sales worldwide."

    So China will make its last VCR under contract for a Japanese rebrander.

    1. Re:What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funai Electric makes them in their Chinese factory, others brand them, Funai is the OEM.

    2. Re:What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The summary makes perfect sense. Funai is an actual manufacturer, not a rebrander. It's is a multi-national company, with a HQ in Japan and actual factories in China. But the title indeed is wrong.

  3. VCR didn't compete against DVD by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    VCRs haven't competed against DVDs for a long time. If you buy a movie, it has come on DVD (or blue-ray) for over a decade.

    The reason people buy VCRs now is to record shows off the TV to watch them later. That's not easy to do on a DVD player. So as DVRs have become more popular, they've replaced the final uses for VCR.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by operagost · · Score: 1

      I guess the real question is: how long before the last Blu-Ray player is manufactured? I'm betting on 2021. Check this space, if Slashdot still exists.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Dorianny · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most people myself included, get a new VCR because the old one is acting wonky and they still have a large library of tapes, much of it old home movies that they haven't had the time or inclination to transfer to digital. As the equipment gets harder to find and the film on the tapes degrades, eventually I will have to force myself to tacked the mammoth task of converting it all to digital

    3. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Get a convertor. Every time you watch a VCR tape, after you are done, set it to convert to DVD (or whatever), and then walk away. Low effort, and the things you watch the most will be converted first.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the equipment gets harder to find and the film on the tapes degrades, eventually I will have to force myself to tacked the mammoth task of converting it all to digital

      You should probably get to it before the tapes degrade.

      Oh who am I kidding.

      I'm not going to do it either.

    5. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The real reason they buy VCR now is to watch their old VHS tapes. Some people still have a collection. And doesn't want to buy the DVD or BlueRay or streaming rights.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a dvd player/recorder that worked exactly like a VCR in that regard. Down to the blinking 12:00 when the power flickered. Think it was made by Panasonic. Was great. I loaned it to my sister to dub some family movies onto DVD and never saw it again...sigh.

    7. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by mjwx · · Score: 2

      VCRs haven't competed against DVDs for a long time. If you buy a movie, it has come on DVD (or blue-ray) for over a decade. The reason people buy VCRs now is to record shows off the TV to watch them later. That's not easy to do on a DVD player. So as DVRs have become more popular, they've replaced the final uses for VCR.

      We've had DVR's for that for a long time now. The VCR is used almost elusively by the security industry because some laggards haven't updated to digital storage. There are a few VCR enthusiasts out there, same as there is for everything but they're very few in number and certainly not enough to sustain a single manufacturing plant.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    8. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so adorable that you think that's spelled "blue-ray".

    9. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      DVD Recorders have been around a decade. You can record live TV on a DVD just as easily as you can with a VCR. In fact, I bought a combo VCR and DVD-RW for my father-in-law right around 2005.

    10. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by lgw · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd take that bet. The big studios love BluRay, as it's a revenue model they understand and fully control. They aren't exactly fast learners. I heard an MPAA executive shouted "ouch" in a meeting today because he had stubbed his toe over the weekend.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Solandri · · Score: 1

      DVRs don't entirely replace VCRs. The tapes used to record shows on a VCR are portable between VCRs. You can record a show at your home, then lend the tape to one of your co-workers. You can't really do that with a DVR because they're a lot more expensive than a tape, you don't have your DVR while it's on loan (whereas you can just stick a new tape into a VCR), and Hollywood has been trying its damnedest to prevent you from sharing shows in this manner by mandating encryption in DVRs and broadcast standards to stop you from simply sharing the file of the recording.

      This last aspect of VCRs has been replaced by pirated filesharing - both online and via thumb drives.

    12. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by tsqr · · Score: 2

      VCRs haven't competed against DVDs for a long time. If you buy a movie, it has come on DVD (or blue-ray) for over a decade.

      Well, you'd certainly think so. And in terms of competing, you're right. But amazingly, you can still buy movies in VHS format.

    13. Re: VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I recently bought a VHS tape because it was the only fornat the video I wanted was on. And no, it wasn't porn. It was a movie that Disney screwed up when it took over distribution rights.

    14. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by tsqr · · Score: 1

      It's so adorable that you think that's spelled "blue-ray".

      Wait - how do you think "blue-ray" is spelled?

    15. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      In my experience, DVRs produce DRM'ed recordings, so they are less convenient to archive and may have problems playing on another DVR (in case the original one fails). On the other hand, VHS tapes can be played on any other VHS VCR.

      That being said, I now usually record TV shows straight from the IPTV provider (it helps that I actually am an admin for a couple of them, but I would be able to record from my ISP if I wasn't), so I mainly use my VCR to record some shows that I really want to keep (I record from DVB-C or analog cable and the tape is a backup in case the recording from IPTV fails).

      Also, some times it is more convenient to just put in a tape to watch something than to boot up the PC that is connected to the TV.

      8 years ago I bought my last brand new VCR and it failed shortly after the warranty expired (part of the tape transport broke). After that, I only bought used ones, my current main VCR is a professional grade SVHS (manual tracking, manual audio levels).

    16. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Zak3056 · · Score: 1

      Without the e?

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    17. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by tsqr · · Score: 1

      Without the e?

      Well, if you're talking about the trademark, then it's not blu-ray (blue-ray without the e); it's Blu-Ray. If you're going to be pedantic, why not go all the way? Or, you could just confess that you knew what the OP was referring to, and not get your underwear in a wad over something of little consequence.

    18. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We reached that point years ago, and if you have to buy an eBay VCR when yours fails, your conversions will be lower quality than if played on the machine they were recorded on. VHS sucked that way.

      The good news is that Time Base Correctors are inexpensive now, so I was able to fix flagging and color problems caused by playing on a different machine in most cases.

      I had a huge tape collection, 75% of which turned out to be worthless because much better copies of the shows and movies are now available, but I did convert the remaining 25% to MP4 files. A few tapes were completely unplayable because time is very hard on magnetic tape.

      I can't believe anyone would fail to upgrade home movies to a durable format, and just wait for them to degrade into uselessness while planning to convert them someday. That's destroying things via procrastination that should be handed down to your descendants.

    19. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      DVD is a bad choice. It's another dead format, and uses crappy old Mpeg 2 compression so the data is at least 10x the size it should be. You can convert and compress to a modern format, and play them from PCs and streaming devices. This also makes backup to sites like DropBox possible.

    20. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      DVDs are just as obsolete as VHS, and can degrade just as quickly.

    21. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by invid · · Score: 1

      Once 5G comes around no one is going to own their own media, it will all be on the cloud and streamed.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    22. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      DVD is a format far from dead thanks to the practically free ability for manufacturers to provide support for it. There's no Bluray player on the market that can't also play DVDs right now, and that won't change until Bluray as a format dies too.

      But DVD has a heck of a lot going for it. You can easily play it back on any player unencumbered by codec support. The decoders are available open source, and the tools to encode them are widely available. The same can not be said for any modern format some of which are stillbirths. If you want to archive something then something like VP8 or HEVC is not a good choice at all. H.264 is a bit better but support for it is still no where near as universal as a classic pop it in a player and hit play DVD.

      But really if the data is important to you then selecting one format is a silly thing in the first place as many HDDVD owners will attest to.

    23. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Most people myself included, get a new VCR because the old one is acting wonky and they still have a large library of tapes, much of it old home movies that they haven't had the time or inclination to transfer to digital. As the equipment gets harder to find and the film on the tapes degrades, eventually I will have to force myself to tacked the mammoth task of converting it all to digital

      I am in this boat right now. My nice old Toshiba VCR bit the dust, and I would like to gain access to my mountain of VCR tapes.

      So my question is: Does this mean that there will not be any more VCR/DVD Combo machines either?

    24. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by slew · · Score: 1

      While I'm pretty sure there is a warehouse somewhere in the world full of VCR/DVD machines, but since warehouse space is expensive, I'm also pretty sure that they will all be "recycled" long before anyone gets a chance to purchase them...

    25. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't exactly fast learners.

      LOL, big words from the guy who rants in his journal about the "whole global warming fraud," which is an obvious event even to small children.

    26. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm confused. Why do you insist on spelling it wrong?

    27. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      VCRs haven't competed against DVDs for a long time. If you buy a movie, it has come on DVD (or blue-ray) for over a decade.

      The reason people buy VCRs now is to record shows off the TV to watch them later. That's not easy to do on a DVD player. So as DVRs have become more popular, they've replaced the final uses for VCR.

      There was a brief period (10ish years ago?) that set top DVD recorders were readily available and could be used for time-shifting (like DVRs and VCRs). They also made it easy to digitize VHS home movies. And until PC optical drives started disappearing, you could even take the disc and watch it on your PC.

      Now with Broadcast and cable formats turning to HD, VCRs and set top DVD recorders are fairly useless at timeshifting.

    28. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      That's not easy to do on a DVD player.

      HUH? It was just as easy to do, if not easier, as recording on VCRs.. (BTW, I used 2 VCRs for a long time to be able to either record 2 things at once, or more likely, watch one tape/skip ads while recording something else.. The dual Go-Video ones never seemed worth it though.)

      There were plenty of standalone DVD recorders, and even some combo hard drive/DVD recorders.. I have one of them, the Toshiba XS32. (I still route one of my Tivos through it, though dub to it much less nowadays.. still once in a while, usually for temporary use, since it can play back faster than realtime.)

      Basically, they are/were "VCR-like" in that they had timers and such. Though at least this one (and I believe similar ones without a hard drive) had enable/disable-able timers, and you could manually give the timers titles so they would show up with titles rather than just date/channel... Also, you can edit recordings before dubbing to DVD. Unfortunately, the Tivo/DVD recorder had NO editing functionality, so I never got that. If I could've edited out commercials on it, then dubbed to DVD, it would have been far superior to timer-like recordings on others.

      Even though I now transfer recordings to an external hard drive (through Tivo supported means), it's kind of a shame that recordable & re-recordable BluRays never got big enough to become relatively cheap, IMHO.

    29. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      And spinning hard disks never fail right?

    30. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by lord_mike · · Score: 1

      DVD recorders won't record commercial tapes encoded with macrovision, so it will only work with personal home recordings. Most video capture cards will also reject the video input if it's copy protected with macrovision. There are ways around this, of course, but it requires time, effort, and money to do so.

    31. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      You already paid for the movies once, when you bought them as videotapes. I think you're quite morally if not legally justified in torrenting the movie and saving it as backup. I see it as no different than if you were ripping from a DVD you own, as an alternative to converting from tape, which may not be so good (since it's analog -> digital), plus videotapes are prone to jamming or growing fungus over years of disuse.

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    32. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Anectodal evidence, but some stupid smartphone from 2013 can read VP8 fine, at least if it's in a .webm. Make a webm as if it were for youtube and I'm suspecting it's rather well supported on the long term.
      H264 is the obviously easier choice but only in .mp4 container else it fails. Mmm, .3gp can contain H264 too actually. Well I sort of don't like all this crap. But if something can read video from USB, there's good chance it can read H264 mp4.

    33. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Same reason I miss floppies.

    34. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      DVD recorders won't record commercial tapes encoded with macrovision,

      In my experience, Disney tapes are mainly the ones that use macrovision. My experience may or may not be representative.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    35. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      HUH? It was just as easy to do, if not easier, as recording on VCRs.

      Had to make sure your dvds didn't get fingerprints, even after multiple recordings

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    36. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without the 'e' and the 'a'.

    37. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blu-ry?

    38. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that UHD content on Bluray arrived in April this year, I wouldn't hurry to wrote Bluray's epitaph. There's a movie coming (in Japan) which will come on the first three layer Bluray in UHD.

      UHD from Bluray is very nice. UHD content online is significantly more compressed. UHD Blurays can offer extended colour range, as well as 2160p and better audio (Dolby Atmos)..

    39. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Many years ago I installed a few CCTV systems. Fully digital of course. One of the clients kept some VCRs around too. Not hooked up to anything, just powered on with the clock set. He said that in previous burglaries the crooks had taken the DVR with them, to destroy evidence presumably, so he wanted the VCRs as dummies to be taken instead.

      No idea if it worked or not, but he was always looking in the local paper for used VCRs.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    40. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, big words from the guy who rants in his journal about the "whole global warming fraud," which is an obvious event even to small children.

      You can speak Mr Coward, you are the source of 90% of the shit comments in Slashdot.
      Also, stop talking to yourself, that's retarded.

    41. Re: VCR didn't compete against DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too.
      I wanted a copy of a weird little film called =
      I married a very strange person..
      It only exists on vhs,as far as I can find there is no legal DVD/blu-ray version to buy and I don't torrent anything..

    42. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed, the global warming fraud is indeed an obvious event,

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    43. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by lgw · · Score: 1

      Well done, sir.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    44. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Well I sort of don't like all this crap.

      This is the most truest line in this entire thread. Whatever method is the best there's no denying the entire thing is a clusterf**k

    45. Re:VCR didn't compete against DVD by gustygolf · · Score: 1

      and uses crappy old Mpeg 2 compression so the data is at least 10x the size it should be.

      I think you are overestimating modern codecs. H264 is only about twice as space efficient as MPEG-2, for the same quality. The most modern codec we have, H265, has a 20-25 % edge over H264.

      Yes, you can squeeze video to 400-800 kbps if you want, but high quality still takes high bit rates.

      --
      "Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 58 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment" -- slashdot, driving users away.
  4. 3/4 million sold last year by silas_moeckel · · Score: 2

    Who in hell bought these?

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
    1. Re:3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have been surprised to hear that 700,000 total VHS TAPES were sold last year, much less players!!

    2. Re:3/4 million sold last year by HBI · · Score: 2

      People who still have a lot of VHS tapes and don't have access to rocket ship internet speeds. I know a few who live in rural farm areas who get by with DSL ~5 miles from the CO and can't download anything. Nor are interested in rebuying stuff they already have on DVD.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    3. Re:3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pakistan.

    4. Re: 3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As you yourself may currently be presently aware, my grammar sucks.

    5. Re:3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Its actually still pretty common device in security systems and in some cases on demand services still use banks of VCRs (hotels mostly) a large telco that does IPTV in Canada still has some in service for local hotels on demand services, at least they did last year while i still worked there

    6. Re:3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would love to buy the programmes again on DVD and I have been doing exactly that but I am now down to VHS tapes containing programmes either not on DVD or which I cannot buy at a reasonable price here in the UK because I would have to buy the DVD from overseas and then pay import costs on top of that.

      The tracking isn't all that great on some of my tapes as well so transferring to DVD wouldn't exactly create great results especially when you also consider the usual losses in that transfer process.

    7. Re:3/4 million sold last year by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      People whos old VHS player broke and wants a new one.

      Some people still have quite a collection of VHS that they would like to watch.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:3/4 million sold last year by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Anyone who actually wants to make/own their own copy of a broadcasted show so they don't have a dependency on being connected to the Internet and to have to pay again to stream it, and someone else keeping it available?

    9. Re:3/4 million sold last year by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      I can not figure out why you would keep DVD's around rip them once and be done with it. VHS is the same though the hardware to do so has a nominal cost.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    10. Re:3/4 million sold last year by operagost · · Score: 1

      Maybe because DVDs take up a lot of disk space?

      Extra features are also pretty clunky that way.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    11. Re:3/4 million sold last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a VCR last year so I can watch my VHS-C mini cassetes put in a cassette adapter to play in a regular VCR. I still use my panasonic VHS-c camcorder to shoot videos. I have a 4k UHD HDR10 tv at home that goes well with the quality VCR has to offer.

    12. Re:3/4 million sold last year by crankyspice · · Score: 1

      Who in hell bought these?

      Among other users, prisons and psych hospitals for their "day room" libraries.

      --
      geek. lawyer.
    13. Re:3/4 million sold last year by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      DVD take up a pile of physical space and are apt to get damaged? A DVD in HVEC is what a few hundred mb?

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    14. Re:3/4 million sold last year by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      My old HD homerun does a bang up job at that. Hells in the late 90's it was a directivo and pulling the data off that.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
  5. Still rockin my laser disc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Suck it hipsters!

  6. People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for dummi by raymorris · · Score: 2

    I imagine two groups of people are still buying them, aside for specialty uses.

    Some people BUY movies, and some of those have hundreds of video tapes they've purchased over the years. For some old movies, they can be replaced with DVD iexpensively, but Disney is an important exception. 50 Disney movies isn't cheap.

    I also know people for whom their primary entertainment is shows they've recorded. They are comfortable with their routine. Current DVRs available for purchase haven't converted all of these people, and DVRs rented from the cable company are expensive.

    Then there are 200 niche uses, with ten or twenty people in each niche.

  7. Just 750,000 sales worldwide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That sounds like a lot to me.

  8. kinda sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    750,000 sales isn't enough to be interesting these days :(

    No one can just make money anymore, you have to make MORE than you made yesterday or you're a failure :/
    (Wonder how that will work out for Nintendo next year...)

    1. Re:kinda sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is nothing new. Any company that doesn't surpass last years revenue is "failing" and "in trouble". It's been like that for at least 25 years.

    2. Re:kinda sad by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      I'm out of mod points, or I would have modded parent insightful.

    3. Re:kinda sad by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well Good old economics 101.
      750,000 in sales could be good however without the demand, it could mean making each unit at a loss.
      People are not going to spend thousands of dollars on a VHS where alternatives are much cheaper. So they will need to sell them at under $100 a pop. Then you have labor cost to make around 2,000 units a day. And parts that are getting more expensive. Having the building to keep operational... It all adds up If they could do 1 million it may be more justifiable.

      It isn't always about growth. But you can't sell your units at a net loss.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:kinda sad by sootman · · Score: 2

      I'm sure some Chinese company -- maybe one you've kind heard of (like Huawei) or maybe a totally new one -- will pick up the slack. 750k units/year oughtta be enough for someone. If there's only one choice on the shelf, it'll sell no matter what name is on the box.

      Free tip: make one VCR and sell it under two brand names. Make the first slightly flimsy-looking (like a late-90s entry-level Mitsubishi unit) and sell it for $X, and make the other weigh 6oz more (via the addition of a useless steel plate in the top), and give it a slightly more upscale-looking set of buttons (think Sony in the 80s) and sell it for $X+10.

      I wish I had the capital to get into the business. This is a total gimme. There are enough tapes out there to keep a small company afloat for 5-10 years. Make hay while the sun shines.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    5. Re:kinda sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      750,000 sales isn't enough to be interesting these days :(

      Interesting to who? If it's interesting to you, you can hop into the market and make yourself a nice little profit. My guess is that after all the expense it wouldn't be worth it for you. Which is why it's not worth it for them either.

    6. Re:kinda sad by sootman · · Score: 2

      (One of those times when I wish there was an edit button...)

      One last thought: make a model for a few bucks more with a built-in analog-to-digital converter (c'mon, that's gotta be like 20 cents now for something that only needs to do SD video) and let it output straight to a USB drive. Hell, maybe add a couple more circuits to 'upscale' to HD because people are idiots. If you wanna be really fancy, give it some built-in storage and a browser-based front-end so you can watch from any device in the house, and of course mobile apps because (again) people are idiots and don't understand right-clicking and "save as" in a browser.)

      Come to think of it, just do the network thing and skip the USB. Just a button that says "capture to digital" and then you download it from another machine and/or post to YT or FB. 16 GB storage will hold ~16 hours of SD video, 640x480* @ 30fps ar around 1500kbps (which is PLENTY for tape.) Also, convert from 480i to 480p, always and only. And, from experience, bump up the contrast a bit. Analog tape can't make blacks as dark as people are now used to.)

      *FUCK* I want to do this. THE MONEY IS SITTING THERE ON THE TABLE, WAITING TO BE TAKEN. You have a GENERATION of people with disposable income and a childhood's worth of tapes they want to convert, but it needs to be a bit slicker than existing video capture solutions.

      Can someone with more time and experience than I have do a kickstarter of this? I'm not looking for a cut of the profits, I just want this to exist. Hell, I'll back it and buy the first one.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    7. Re:kinda sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same thing; they're butthurt over "only" 750K units sold?

    8. Re:kinda sad by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Wonder how that will work out for Nintendo next year...

      That's an interesting question that people have been asking Nintendo for 20 years now.

    9. Re:kinda sad by mysidia · · Score: 1

      How about you take a 1-year hit to reduce your revenue to $1..... so you can be "in trouble for one year" then gradually grow it back doubling every year over the next 25 years..... 100% growth, FTW!

    10. Re:kinda sad by mysidia · · Score: 1

      People are not going to spend thousands of dollars on a VHS where alternatives are much cheaper.

      If they are selling 750,000 units a year, there is OBVIOUSLY still demand for them.

      The only question is.... how strong will that demand be in the case of increasing prices?

      I don't know the answer to the question. It would be helpful to know why people still want to buy VCRs.

      If they have priceless home videos on VHS, then people may be willing to spend more than $1000 on a VCR, by the way, just to be able to play their tapes back and convert them to MP4s.....

    11. Re:kinda sad by Master+Moose · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, the number of time I hear about "XXX in trouble as profits down on last year"

      As far as I am aware, profit means you made more than you spent, Being profitable is good. So, while more profit is good, less profit is also good and definitely not "Trouble".

      --
      . . .gone when the morning comes
    12. Re:kinda sad by zrobotics · · Score: 1

      And as we all know, Amazon has been a deeply troubled company on the verge of folding for many years now. How silly, investing in growing the business...

    13. Re:kinda sad by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's a market flooded by used units that can be had for practically nothing. They overcome this by making high end units, but now that they are facing an expensive re-design due to parts becoming obsolete they can see that it just isn't worth it.

      Maybe another company will step in, but if say some low cost Chinese manufacturer wants to start making VCRs they will have to spend the money developing a high end reliable unit because at the cheap end of the market old stock and free used VCRs will make it impossible to make their investment back. At best you might see some trying to cash in with cheap junk, before people realize they are a waste of money.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:kinda sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That actually makes sense. You're talking about business reporting. They can issue statements like "profits down due to factory fire" or just "profits down". The latter is worrying, why isn't the company telling what caused the decrease? Is it an incidental problem? Or is this a problem that could grow further and cause even lower profits next year? When companies are in control, they'll tell the press, so the press has good reason to assume problems are NOT under control when the CEO stays silent.

  9. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    but Disney is an important exception. 50 Disney movies isn't cheap.

    And Disney VHS cassettes come with DRM, so you can't always convert them to DVD yourself.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  10. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by whoever57 · · Score: 2

    And Disney VHS cassettes come with DRM, so you can't always convert them to DVD yourself.

    You just need a video "stabilizer"

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  11. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    How do you DRM an Analog Recording?

    All the VHS to DVD converters I have seen you just plug in the Analog Video and Audio out (Yellow, White Red) to a receiver then it converts it to a digital signal.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  12. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

    If you look on the net, you'll find lots of people have been kind enough to do it for you.

  13. Re: People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What, you never heard of a cable descrambler? Those things were the shit in the 90's. I'm so glad I didn't pay to watch that Woodstock where everyone went apeshit about bottled water.
    The digital ones were cool too, but they were spoofers, not descramblers. They just made your box look like test equipment so no charges. Too bad they got blocked so fast.

  14. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google on macrovision

  15. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    read up on macrovision.

    lots of ways to mess with analog signals and 'drm them'.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  16. Title is wrong by acoustix · · Score: 1

    The VCRs are made in China by a Japanese company. VCRs haven't been made *in* Japan for a while now.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
  17. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Think old games with "illegal" floppy disk sectors, but this time with some anomalous out of spec bursts on the signal.
    Now, either you gear defeats this old analog stuff, or it is of no consequence given it was intended to make a second VCR in writing mode fail.

    BTW the one converter I saw was not really a converter per se, but a combined VCR and DVD player and burner.
    An old TV tuner PCI card would be cool too : there's usually a composite input, and even if the TV antenna input isn't useful for TV anymore you may use it to receive FM radio instead.

  18. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    but Disney is an important exception. 50 Disney movies isn't cheap.

    And Disney VHS cassettes come with DRM, so you can't always convert them to DVD yourself.

    I would argue it's not worth the effort. Most of Disney's high-profile movies are available restored on blu-ray now. The increase in picture and audio quality is worth rebuying instead of converting an analog SD format to a newer medium.

  19. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by operagost · · Score: 1

    Macrovision isn't exactly DRM. Heck, back in the day we could defeat it with a baseband signal adapter from Radio Shack. You could adjust the signal level, and peg the AGC circuit so that it couldn't be fooled into screwing with the brightness anymore.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  20. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by operagost · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that at any one time, a large selection of Disney movies are "in the vault" and not available for purchase at retail. That is an issue. And Disney's anti-consumer attitude in this manner has actually subjected them to MORE piracy. Of course, when you have most of Congress in your pocket, you can have copyright terms extended periodically to compensate.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  21. I still use a Funai VCR/DVD by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Works fine with my 720 line digital TV. Paid for itself by avoiding cable DVR fees. I hear it wontbwork with a 1080.

  22. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    In the analogue realm there's lots of ways to apply DRM to a signal but all of which require the support from a hardware manufacturer to implement the lockout. There's nothing someone can do to stop you copying a VHS if the recorder ignores macrovision, and most of them do.

    If modern DRM is putting a money in a safe, handing you a key and telling you that you're only allowed to open the safe when you're told to, then old school macrovision is putting money in a safe, leaving the door open, handing you the key and telling you that when told you should lock up the safe.

  23. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked at a thrift shop for a few months. There are people whose children browse the VHS tapes the entire time mom or dad shops and they end up leaving with an armload of them. And they never go away, people bring boxes in just as fast as they go out. It's kind of amazing when you consider what a GOD-AWFUL format it is. People love a bargain, though.

  24. In Related News... by W.+Justice+Black · · Score: 1

    Both the Salvation Army and Goodwill have reported strong supplies of "refurbished" VCRs in a wide variety of makes and models. Get your home entertainment system to blink 12:00 today; stop by your local shop and pick one up!

    --
    "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." --Groucho Marx
  25. They're clearing the channel by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I thought that too at first. But it takes a long time to ship from China. They've probably built up significant stocks they're anticipating demand will be effectively zero after they sell through those stocks.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  26. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > . There's nothing someone can do to stop you copying a VHS if the recorder ignores macrovision, and most of them do.

    Macrovision was originally developed for VCRs that were ALREADY in use. The VCR doesn't have to support Macrovision. It pulses the off-screen lines very bright, then very low, causing the AGC to adjust the picture brightness in the opposite direction.

  27. I keep one or two around! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have one - maybe two - VCRs around. Both are very old, but at least one is a nice four head model. You never know when you might find an old tape and wonder what is on it or know what is on it and want that content.

  28. 750,000 by xlsior · · Score: 2

    750,000 units a year is still over 2,000 a day -- there's plenty of companies that would kill for those kind of numbers.

    1. Re:750,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, there aren't. The patents on VHS have pretty much expired, and yet nobody else is taking over the business. Keep in mind that this number is only going to drop further, and the margins will be razor thin. Would you build a new factory, and if so, for how many VHS recorders per day? It wouldn't surprise me if margins were as lows as $1/recorder, and the decline is about 100K/year. That gives you 7.5 years left, with about $2.6 million in future margins. Will that repay your factory?

    2. Re:750,000 by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Buy somebody's manufacturing plant. Jack up the prices; if you're the only maker of new machines, you can set the price almost arbitrarily. If it doesn't work, it's because the demand side is completely gone.

      In 1980, a new VCR was $750. Today, they're $90 combined with a DVD player. That would indicate that there's some room for price increases for people who really want a new machine.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  29. Re: People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or a camcorder.

  30. Protip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Download the torrents. Much easier.

  31. Video Cassettes! by Balr0g · · Score: 1

    According to this article http://www.heise.de/newsticker... it's not VCRs but video cassettes. Which make the number much more plausible IMHO.

    1. Re:Video Cassettes! by Balr0g · · Score: 1

      No, it's VCRs - they corrected their article.

  32. the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    V2000 for me.

  33. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

    There were also devices specifically designed to filter out the noise Macrovision added in the VBI. I think I still have one kicking around somewhere; if you google "Macrovision removal circuit," you'll find several largely similar devices that'll do the job.

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  34. Re:People with hundreds of tapes? Recording for du by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    You're missing my point. The VCR has no say in the matter which makes this DRM scheme the most easily circumvented. You're entirely relying on the receiving equipment to do something with the signal, and surprise surprise most cheap video capture dongles have no problem with this.

    If you can display it on a TV, you can display it on your computer screen. If you can display it on a computer screen you can capture the MPG stream.

    DRM in the digital world only concerns itself preventing bit-perfect copies. The analogue hole wasn't closeable by Macrovision because the entire technology was analogue.

  35. I was a hold-out to the end by volpe · · Score: 1

    I don't have a DVR. I had been using VHS to record some late-night shows that I would enjoy watching in the morning while on my treadmill. This worked up until Time Warner Cable made my VCR unusable by ceasing analog broadcasts to my VCR's tuner was of no use. I don't want to rent several DVRs from TWC. I found a company on the web that sells a variety of M-Card enabled DVRs and cable boxes, but they turned out to be a scam. So, I'm wondering what I should do. I hear TiVo doesn't work without a subscription anymore. Have I no recourse but to rent multiple boxes from TWC?