3...2...1...gone

[BobK]

> I cant recall any LD-player (or "reader" since it would be for PC), not even one (ofcoz external one hehe). Yeah, some standalone LD players had RS- connector for *controlling* the unit of off PC, but thats about it.

I can't recall any record (LP) player for a PC either, not even one.

LD-Players were pretty much dead long before PCs became a common household item. Actually LD-Players were pretty much dead before they ever got much life at all.

I was in the Army in Germany when LD Players first came out. At that time, electronics were very cheap in the electronics stores on military bases and everybody bought high-end stereo systems, etc. But in the 10 years after LD-Players were put on the market I only knew 2 people that ever owned one.

I'd bet my next year's paycheck that if LD-Players were as popular as DVD Players then you'd see all kinds of LD-Readers for PCs.

[Nilfennasion]

The rules of survival for digital media are pretty clear. For any consumer video format to survive, there has to be a recordable version. VHS opened that door. The film studios tried suing Sony to stop Betamax from ever appearing, and they lost. Now, they're trying to shut the gate after the horse has left.

Laserdisc is a somewhat outside example. It was originally released well before the home entertainment revolution. The most technologically advanced thing other than Laserdisc that was available in the home was the Intellivision at that time. The reason it died was because when the time became right to push it as the format for home entertainment, they did sod all about it.

They still haven't learned from that mistake. Witness the total non-event that DVD-Audio has turned into.

[andkiich]

To piggyback on the previous post...

Not only did they do little to nothing to market the LD format, but when the minimum price on a LD with no extras and cheap packaging is $40 and the special editions are $100+, who but the most die-hard video/audio-phile would/could pay for that? Especially when you could get the same VHS tape for $5-10.

I bought LD because I liked the fact that I could watch a movie 5 or 6 times and not notice degradation in the audio/video, and the player with s-video was higher res(slightly) then standard VHS.

[gitreel]

321 offered no customer service anyway imo, so let them die off.

[Nilfennasion]

Another good reason why Laserdisc died out was that they never even thought to release a PAL version. They tried an abortive launch in Australia when I was about nine years old (by this time the LD format had been just sitting there for at least a decade), but when people discovered that a) the discs were $100 for a set, or more if they wanted the Special Editions and b) a large majority of existing televisions wouldn't be able to sync to them, they left it.

Warners took a while to learn from this. They persistently released NTSC versions of their DVD-Videos in Australia when a large part of their customer base still cannot view NTSC material. At first, they did it because they didn't want to have the NTSC version available in America months before a PAL version was available in Australia (staggered release dates are believed to be the number one reason why people import, but it's more like number four). Once enough people bought that for the release to break even, the floodgates opened.

As far as the 321 Studios thing goes, I agree that they made a knuckleheaded gamble and lost, therefore deserve to be out of business. You don't go suing an organisation like the MPAA unless they did something to deserve it, such as ripping off your script. Suing them preemptively is like breaking a chair over a Hell's Angel's head. You better be prepared for one hell of a reprisal.

[Capmaster]

To piggyback on the previous post...

Not only did they do little to nothing to market the LD format, but when the minimum price on a LD with no extras and cheap packaging is $40 and the special editions are $100+, who but the most die-hard video/audio-phile would/could pay for that? Especially when you could get the same VHS tape for $5-10.

I bought LD because I liked the fact that I could watch a movie 5 or 6 times and not notice degradation in the audio/video, and the player with s-video was higher res(slightly) then standard VHS.

If you remember that far back, commercial VHS movie titles were selling for $70 - $90 each at one time. If LD had caught on, eventually the up-front development costs would have been recouped and then the prices would have dropped - just like VHS movies did.

[Nilfennasion]

When you compare how aggressively DVD-Video has been promoted in the past few years to how passively LD was promoted at any stage, you get your answer as to why it never took off. I still have to explain to some people that LD was around in the 1970s and is in fact the first consumer optical disc format.

[Sam Ontario]

I don't know when LD appeared in North America, but for sure the Asean countries had them in the 80s.

[Capmaster]

Niffennasion is right. They never really pushed LD. It was like their heart wasn't in it or something. Being old enough to remember when it first appeared, and when VCRs first showed up for consumers, I was shocked to find out how long it had been available by the time I first heard of it. It was like a stealth appliance. Nobody knew where to buy them (we didn't have Circuit City or Best Buy back then), how much they cost, if they were any good or just a white elephant. Too bad because it blew Beta and VHS into the weeds in just about every area except home recording.

[Nilfennasion]

At that time, had they pushed the format and it took off, they wouldn't have necessarily had to introduce the concept of recording, either. Before the VCR, the idea of recording a signal from the TV antenna was as alien as the idea of Anna Paquin being in a film she can't save from utter tedium was to me before I saw The 25th Hour. If Sony are seriously wondering why piracy is a fact of life, then they're being run by idiots.

[Capmaster]

At that time, had they pushed the format and it took off, they wouldn't have necessarily had to introduce the concept of recording, either. Before the VCR, the idea of recording a signal from the TV antenna was as alien as the idea of Anna Paquin being in a film she can't save from utter tedium was to me before I saw The 25th Hour. If Sony are seriously wondering why piracy is a fact of life, then they're being run by idiots.

Agreed. I still remember what a novelty it was to actually be able to record video and play it back. It was amazing at the time. I gladly shelled out $30 for a blank 2-hour/4-hour VHS tape 8)

[Nilfennasion]

Indeed. I am experiencing it all over again with DVD+/-R. Nothing quite matches that first buzz you feel when you realise you've just made your own disc and you can actually play it back on your player.

[BJ_M]

well one of the reasons LD's were not pushed much is in production costs ..

LD's cost a LOT to make and package and ship (shipping is a big cost) ...

dvd's -- even when first out - really cost very little make and ship and packaging was about the same or a little more ..

dvd's cost less to make than vhs's even in reality ..

in bulk anyway ...

[proxyx99]

Really don't know why everyone is bringing up LD's (stands for long dead). It was clear from the beginning that this is a temp thing, costly for disc makers and consumers, not portable and really no competition for VHS. Ppl have issues spending 20 bucks for a DVD let alone 100 or close to that. Market is interested in a product that could give you a 1 dollar disc and that is a DVDR. LD died due to cost/benefit issues. Poor market reception plus a promise of a better technology in the near future. Like Betamax it lacked simplicity (both were overdeveloped) that would translate into huge sales and low price point. There has been millions of missed products in the past and LD is one of them although (again, like many) moved things forward and generated interest. Don't think that companies like Sony are morons due to the lack of significant market push while introducing the product. They watch carefully and if there was a chance to create a large audience they would surely have done that.
One more thing, Sony is developing and managing 1000's of items and they do carefully calculate and do choose which ones to push and which ones to abandon. As I said cost/benefit analysis is the key here. They are not in the business to please anyone but to make (!) money.

[Nilfennasion]

Well, BJ, it's really a case of the chicken and the egg when it comes to production cost. CDs weren't exactly cheap to make when they were first introduced, either. At the time, the record companies thought they were going to have us over a barrel forever, so they pushed out as much product as they possibly could on the format. Sure, they made a loss at first, but when consumer interest peaked, they made it back and then some.

If simplicity were a requirement of success, DVD-Video would have died, too. It was a nightmare trying to explain to people that the picture is supposed to not match the shape of the TV, or that enjoying digital audio's full benefits wasn't as simple as plugging the player into the TV. In essence, some leg work had to be done to convince people who weren't cinephiles, or storytellers with cinephile tendencies like myself, why it was the home video equivalent of sliced bread.

The reason I brought up LDs was because the MPAA seems to have a raging hard-on for eradicating piracy, and they had a chance to nip it in the heels long ago by making LD the home video standard and keeping it read-only. Or at least, that's how I interpret the situation. It was possible to record from LD to VHS, but the results weren't exactly something you would want to watch.

[proxyx99]

Because of simplicity (low production cost) VHS kicked Betamax ars. So it is a major factor. As to the rest you seem to be forgetting progress in general (and specifically in technology). Due to the above LD was a DOA. Sony (and alike) knew that as well as users.

[Nilfennasion]

Again, if it was a case of the simpler format winning, VHS would not be begging to be taken out of the doors of retailers. I've seen places where they sell prerecorded ones for a dollar a pop and the shelves are still overflowing.

[verchad]

I agree with an earlier post, if they just made the price cheaper, they wouldn't have to worry about the copying as much. I know I have been in walmart and kmart and have made impulse purchases of dvd's that were in bins for $5.88. Movies that I liked and wanted to see again like Diner and Mr. Baseball. No way would I have paid regular price for these. I've also bought more used dvd's recently online for $5-$7 dollars. I'll still go and get the dvd's for my 4 year old daughter when they first come out but even then I'll watch to see who will have them on sale when they are first released ( buy it the first week it's out and it's $12 - $15, next week $19 - $23 ).

[Nilfennasion]

When I first got into DVD, there was an article listing the twenty signs you were addicted. One of them was that you'd purchased DVDs of films that you had never seen. I think that is more a sign of stupidity, but when the price is $40 per unit, such gambles are often hard to take.

[rkr1958]

When I first got into DVD, there was an article listing the twenty signs you were addicted. One of them was that you'd purchased DVDs of films that you had never seen. I think that is more a sign of stupidity, but when the price is $40 per unit, such gambles are often hard to take.

$40 per DVD?!. I pay around $18 for new releases like LOTR Return of the King. This is approximately what it would cost for two movie tickets with no refreshments. I can wait 6-months after release of the movie to the theathers for the DVD release to see it. To me this is a no-brainer ... a crowed theather or the comfort of my own home and the ability to see and stop the movie whenever and however often I desire.

[Nilfennasion]

$40 is a median price in Australia. I've been to some stores that have the nerve to charge as much as $50 for a local release. I would not be surprised to learn that there is a high correlation between towns that only have one or two retailers where software can be obtained, and high levels of piracy.

[proxyx99]

If not for piracy that many big boys have tolerated and I would say quietly endorsed (Microsoft, IBM and alike) their PC's and software would have had much smaller audience. Quite possibly we would all be Mac users by now. It is piracy that, tolerated, have given them tremendous exposure. PC's were popping up in least expected places geographically. All this was good news as more users means stronger brand that lead to global standard. Once again the genius of Bill Gates sneaked into our homes unnoticed. But now the rules are changing and no wonder.
They were like cigarette makers (speculative scenario) giving products away for free to later cash in. Those who got hooked on know that the party is over.
Studios were quite upfront with their policy from the get go. There was more at stake for them. Wide proliferation of PC with their capabilities became their worst nightmare. No wonder that 321 Studios was an important step in removing obstacles from their path.