No, the author says that VHS succeeding over Betamax was inexplicable to consumers. The fact that there is an Urban Legend (read popular belief) that it is inexplicable says that, to the average consumer, it was.
If you are suggesting that the author, Nigel McFarlane, knows the truth of the situation and is merely stating what the consumers thought (not what he himself thinks), then I think you are mistaken because Nigel writes, "Examined objectively, VHS just wasn't as good as Betamax." False! VHS was better.
As far as I know, the Urban Legend about betamax being superior arose well AFTER the war was over. If you are claiming that people were confused about it *at the time*, then I challenge you to present evidence of this. I am fairly sure people were NOT confused about which was better at the time -- it is damn well obvious if one type of VCR advertises "1 hour recording time" (Beta) and another type of VCR advertises "2 hour recording time" (VHS).
Were you even ALIVE when the VHS/Beta battle was in progress? Did you buy a VCR at that time? I remember that our first VCR was a Betamax. We only had it a short time, and then we sold it second-hand in the local trading-post newspaper when we discovered that VHS was overall better.
Yes it is a non sequitur. Not knowing why one type of video format won out over another type of video format does not preclude someone from having something interesting to say about the future of web-browsers.
tkrotchko NEVER SAID "the author doesn't understand VHS, therefore he doesn't know web browsers either".
What he actually said is: "But if the author doesn't understand why VHS won, then its a good bet why he can't or won't understand which browser will win and why."
And indeed it IS a good bet because it indicates that the author failed to properly research the "facts" mentioned in his article. True, the fact that Nigel was wrong about VHS/Beta does not *definitely* mean he is also wrong about web browsers, but tkrotchko never said that, rather he said "a good bet".
Okay, maybe if you really stretch it, you can call it a non sequitur, but in that case you will also have to call the article a non sequitur because it is the article which first tries to draw a trend similarity between VHS/Beta and web browsers: "VHS just wasn't as good as Betamax. Why on earth did it succeed? The new web browser war is like that."
The ergonomics of the Dvorak keyboard are far superior to Qwerty.
Says who? Mr Dvorak himself? You make this claim, but provide no evidence to back up your claim. Who should we believe, you who makes an unsubstantiated claim, or the article which quotes an IBM Research Laboratory study about the ergonomics?
"Ergonomic studies also confirm that the advantages of Dvorak are either small or nonexistent. For example, A. Miller and J Thomas, two researchers at the IBM Research Laboratory, writing in the International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, conclude that "no alternative has shown a realistically significant advantage over the QWERTY for general purpose typing.""
I have to wonder if these people trying to claim that Dvorak is superior (with no evidence) are Mac users with a grievance against Microsoft, desperate to find any reason to hate Microsoft and worship Apple.
Re:I stopped reading this when...
on
Browser Wars Mark II
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
ctid wrote:
This is as good an example of a non sequitur as I have ever seen.
The originator of this thread (tkrotchko) was not super polite, but nevertheless he is correct in saying that "the author displays an ignorance of why VHS won" -- it is NOT a non sequitur. For those that are interested in learning why, I have posted some quotes about the Betamax vs VHS Urban Legend over in this thread.
STOP posting that Stupid QWERTY article! That is an Urban Legend. It was written by economists who were paid to sway the judge in the Microsoft anti-trust case.
If you look at the date on the QWERTY article (in the URL), is is dated 1996. And according to the following quote from PC Magazine, the anti-trust case started in 1998, i.e. the article was written earlier:
"The groups, the Computer & Communications Industry Association and the Software and Information Industry Association, join Massachusetts and West Virginia in continuing the legal battle that started in 1998."
-- http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,980585,00.asp
In this case they "prove" how good QWERTY is, not through an analysis of keyboard design and mechanics, but through an economic argument.
That is blatantly not true for anyone that actually reads the article. For example, here is a quote from the article which is an ergonomic not economic argument:
"Ergonomic studies also confirm that the advantages of Dvorak are either small or nonexistent. For example, A. Miller and J Thomas, two researchers at the IBM Research Laboratory, writing in the International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, conclude that "no alternative has shown a realistically significant advantage over the QWERTY for general purpose typing.""
Here are a couple of websites I found about the Betamax vs VHS Urban Legend:
"Speaking of quality, you will often hear Betamax fans claiming that Beta was technically better than VHS. However, on closer inspection this turns out to be something of a myth; an advantage Beta might have had was quickly matched by VHS, and anyway was only apparent using sophisticated test equipment. In fact, independant tests of picture quality at the time actually put VHS ahead, the scores over four tests being VHS: 2, Beta: 1, No difference: 1. This urban legend probably reflects Sony's marketing rather than any actual quantifiable difference. "
-- http://www.hypernova.co.uk/total_rewind/sidebars/F _beta.htm
"In any case, for a year Sony had the VCR market to itself, selling 30,000 Betamax VCRs in the US. [2] But when JVC came out with the VHS format VCR in 1976, the stage was set for the format wars. JVC had a machine that already doubled Sony's recording time of one hour, and that difference would prove crucial."
-- http://www.tafkac.org/products/beta_vs_vhs.html
aw crap, I posted the wrong URL, sorry. That URL is actually about another related Urban Legend -- QWERTY versus Dvorak. But the page also does mention the VHS vs Betamax legend briefly. Anyway, people should research these things before blindly repeating urban legends that they heard from their friend joe who heard from their friend who heard from their friend etc etc etc.
Betamax versus VHS easily explained
on
Browser Wars Mark II
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The author claims that VHS succeeding over Betamax is inexplicable. This is an Urban Legend. Here is a well researched article about it:
In summary, the main reason why VHS succeeded was that it was superior because it had longer recording times. Betamax was crippled because the original tapes could not hold a whole movie.
I do not understand why I continue to see so many half-effective anti-spam schemes and complaints about spam. Why on earth is everyone making such a big fuss about spam?? People do not seem to understand that near-perfect blocking of spam is EASY.
I'm not just trolling, there are actual RESEARCH STUDIES which confirm what I am saying. For example, the CDT and FrontBridge studies. I quote these studies on my spam webpage:
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/spam.html
Spam is a complete non-issue for me. I receive virtually no spam. The number of pieces of spam that I receive in 1 year, I could count on 2 hands. The solution is so unbelievably simple that the fuss everyone is making about spam is totally ridiculous and absurd -- it is EASY to stop spam, and the research studies confirm this.
I detest spammers as much as you do, but I think many people do not realize that there is a fairly easy way to avoid spam. The spam problem is only as big as it is because people have failed to take the SIMPLE steps that are necessary to protect themselves from spammers.
Considering how SIMPLE and EASY it is to block spam with 99% effectiveness, I do not understand why I continue to see so many half-effective anti-spam schemes and complaints about spam. Why on earth is everyone making such a big fuss about spam?? People do not seem to understand that near-perfect blocking of spam is EASY.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I know, the Urban Legend about betamax being superior arose well AFTER the war was over. If you are claiming that people were confused about it *at the time*, then I challenge you to present evidence of this. I am fairly sure people were NOT confused about which was better at the time -- it is damn well obvious if one type of VCR advertises "1 hour recording time" (Beta) and another type of VCR advertises "2 hour recording time" (VHS).
Were you even ALIVE when the VHS/Beta battle was in progress? Did you buy a VCR at that time? I remember that our first VCR was a Betamax. We only had it a short time, and then we sold it second-hand in the local trading-post newspaper when we discovered that VHS was overall better.
"But if the author doesn't understand why VHS won, then its a good bet why he can't or won't understand which browser will win and why."
And indeed it IS a good bet because it indicates that the author failed to properly research the "facts" mentioned in his article. True, the fact that Nigel was wrong about VHS/Beta does not *definitely* mean he is also wrong about web browsers, but tkrotchko never said that, rather he said "a good bet".
Okay, maybe if you really stretch it, you can call it a non sequitur, but in that case you will also have to call the article a non sequitur because it is the article which first tries to draw a trend similarity between VHS/Beta and web browsers:
"VHS just wasn't as good as Betamax. Why on earth did it succeed? The new web browser war is like that."
"Ergonomic studies also confirm that the advantages of Dvorak are either small or nonexistent. For example, A. Miller and J Thomas, two researchers at the IBM Research Laboratory, writing in the International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, conclude that "no alternative has shown a realistically significant advantage over the QWERTY for general purpose typing.""
I have to wonder if these people trying to claim that Dvorak is superior (with no evidence) are Mac users with a grievance against Microsoft, desperate to find any reason to hate Microsoft and worship Apple.
"The groups, the Computer & Communications Industry Association and the Software and Information Industry Association, join Massachusetts and West Virginia in continuing the legal battle that started in 1998."p
-- http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,980585,00.as
That is blatantly not true for anyone that actually reads the article. For example, here is a quote from the article which is an ergonomic not economic argument:
"Ergonomic studies also confirm that the advantages of Dvorak are either small or nonexistent. For example, A. Miller and J Thomas, two researchers at the IBM Research Laboratory, writing in the International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, conclude that "no alternative has shown a realistically significant advantage over the QWERTY for general purpose typing.""
aw crap, I posted the wrong URL, sorry. That URL is actually about another related Urban Legend -- QWERTY versus Dvorak. But the page also does mention the VHS vs Betamax legend briefly. Anyway, people should research these things before blindly repeating urban legends that they heard from their friend joe who heard from their friend who heard from their friend etc etc etc.
http://reason.com/9606/Fe.QWERTY.shtml
In summary, the main reason why VHS succeeded was that it was superior because it had longer recording times. Betamax was crippled because the original tapes could not hold a whole movie.
I'm not just trolling, there are actual RESEARCH STUDIES which confirm what I am saying. For example, the CDT and FrontBridge studies. I quote these studies on my spam webpage:
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/spam.html
Spam is a complete non-issue for me. I receive virtually no spam. The number of pieces of spam that I receive in 1 year, I could count on 2 hands. The solution is so unbelievably simple that the fuss everyone is making about spam is totally ridiculous and absurd -- it is EASY to stop spam, and the research studies confirm this.
Considering how SIMPLE and EASY it is to block spam with 99% effectiveness, I do not understand why I continue to see so many half-effective anti-spam schemes and complaints about spam. Why on earth is everyone making such a big fuss about spam?? People do not seem to understand that near-perfect blocking of spam is EASY.
For more info:
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/spam.html