Why VHS Was Better Than Betamax 298
Vladimir Kornea writes "This article argues that 'when someone buys and uses a product, the technological aspects are a small and often uninteresting part of the decision' and that the when the 'whole product' (a term commonly used among marketing people) is considered, VHS was better than Betamax, and that the Wintel PC is better than the alternatives." Update: 01/29 04:26 GMT by T : Apologies for the dupe.
DUPE! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:DUPE! (Score:5, Funny)
Just like a good movie on a VCR tape, this story worth rewinding and playing again and again.
I never get tired of VHS vs. Betamax flamewars. Nothing could be more compelling, relevant or engaging than debating the relative merits of these 20-year old tape formats a few more times.
Re:DUPE! (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:DUPE! (Score:2)
It didn't run here... (Score:2)
Re:It didn't run here... (Score:2)
I wouldn't call it a 'slashdot with boobies' site per se, because there's a helluva lot more than geek-tech news, but it seems to apply to most of the interests of geeks without offending too many of them.
Re:It didn't run here... (Score:2, Funny)
Pssh. Like they exist.
Re:DUPE! (Score:2)
The wonderful thing about altshiemers is that you can send presents to yourself and they are still a surprise when you open them. You also can enjoy
congratulations (Score:2, Funny)
today's dupe loser is timothy [monkey.org]
thanks for playing, Vladimir, and timothy. good tteamwork!
would you like to know more about dupe posting? [slashdot.org]
Re:DUPE! (Score:2)
If you are using Gnome I suggest you try SlashApp. It is a ticker-like applet showing headlines from slashdot or gnotices.
I'm sure I saw that exact headline earlier, but it might be more than one day ago.
first post! (Score:5, Funny)
second post!
Re:first post! (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, COME ON, this is sad.... (Score:1, Redundant)
Just posted Sunday: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/26/028207 [slashdot.org]
Re:Oh, COME ON, this is sad.... (Score:3, Insightful)
This time, it's even pointing to the same exact article, not just the same story covered by someone else
A new all-time slashdot low...
As previously reported on /. (Score:1, Redundant)
Two days ago.
but this article is better (Score:4, Funny)
Why it was better.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why it was better.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Huh, hello? (Score:2)
Huh, hello? (Score:2, Redundant)
Tivo's quality settings (Score:2)
Haha, too true. When I first got my Tivo (60Hr Series2), I recorded stuff at all the various quality levels. High quality was too disk-consuming, the level below that (good? I forget) was also too disk-hungry and not noticably different than high quality. Basic quality seemed kind of appalling on the first few programs I recorded -- even my wife, who's about as nontechnical as they come was noticing some artifacts.
So I stuck with medium quality for a while, but I noticed I just wasn't getting the retention I wanted when I had a lot of movies recorded, so I started switching to basic quality on some stuff, and lo and behold I noticed that it wasn't all that bad.
I've been sold on basic since then, but I've noticed its kind of all over the map. Some stuff I find indistinguishable from medium quality, some stuff is pretty appalling. Music videos, for example, have too many jump cuts and quick camera movements -- the quality there sucks. But a lot of other content appears just fine, especially content originally shot on film. Even old Rockford episodes are good, and especially good are recordings of filmed content shown on digital channels; analog noise from analog channels must hinder the compressor.
Anyway, you're right -- basic quality has become more than good enough, at least until a do a disk upgrade and get a DVD recorder to copy stuff too, but even then I may stick with the longest content length...
Re:Tivo's quality settings (Score:2)
slashdot's new theme... (Score:5, Funny)
Is this a duplicate?? (Score:1)
Beta will always be better for DUPLICATION.... (Score:5, Funny)
wink, wink, nudge nudge... say no more.
I'll burn karma... (Score:1)
old news is the best news... (Score:1, Redundant)
I guess it just goes to prove that there's nothing new under the sun...
or is it that the technology news cycle is simply accelerating to the point where upgrades, viruses, security patches and new releases, reports and share market fluctuations are passing us by at such a rate that it only seems like we're reading yesterday's news today?
Perhaps this is where all that dark matter really is residing...
I'll stop now.
The real reason VHS was better than betamax.. (Score:4, Funny)
Better Copies.
TOP SECRET (Score:2)
Duplicate posts are designed to drive just enough people mad that slashdot ceases to be stupid.
And by stupid, I don't mean the people *running* it.
Model T Ford (Score:5, Insightful)
Why Beta Lost... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why Beta Lost... (Score:2)
Re:Model T Ford (Score:4, Insightful)
If the whole product includes the network externalities involved with purchasing the dominant product, which is the argument that the author makes about 'Wintel PCs', then the superior technology is by definition the winning technology, and vice versa. I think we still want and need to separate out technological issues from the strategic marketing decisions. The "whole product" concept does not prove that an inferior technology cannot prevail in the marketplace, it simply defines the possibility out of existence.
annmariabell.com [annmariabell.com]
Re:Model T Ford (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Model T Ford (Score:2, Insightful)
"Their spouses/children/grandparents and everybody else would quickly have told them the truth. "We're going out tonight and I want to record a movie. That Betamax tape is useless: it isn't long enough. Get rid of it."
because it says here:
"All of the video machines in use and all of the pre-recorded movies were Betamax. It had a de facto monopoly, and an element of lock-in (because of tape incompatibilities). It lost because, at the time, it could not do what consumers wanted: record a whole movie unattended."
how is it possible that 100% of pre-recorded MOVIES were on Beta, yet Beta tapes weren't long enough to record an entire MOVIE?
I think the author of this article is fucked in the head.
I've still got a Sony C9...
Re:Model T Ford (Score:2)
Re:Model T Ford (Score:5, Informative)
I am uncomfortable with the idea of assigning "best" to the dominant player simply because it dominates sales, which the article seems to imply in ways, and that it really isn't any better of a way to evaluate how good something is. Is McDonald's the best at burgers simply because they have the highest sales? The only thing that McDonald's really did right was by hitting a happy medium of price, quality, speed and convenience.
What the article does get right is by showing a lot of reasons why a different product didn't do as well, and shows why being better doesn't mean you'll dominate. Does better marketing really make a better product? I don't think so, it really only improves sales.
There are lots of choices. Which choices make the best sense _depends_on_the_situation_. Sure, infrastructure and support matters. Sure, price matters. But there's usually a reason the competing, more expensive, less supported products still exist despite those obstacles: there is _still_ a market for it. The answer to the issue lies in what you plan to do with it.
Did VHS win? In the consumer market, yes, and probably overall production volume, yes. But the price and library concerns don't affect video professionals the same way. As you point out, Beta was the choice for a lot of TV stations. TV stations don't care whether rental stores had Beta copies of Vampire Vixens from Outer Space, because they generally don't use the decks that way.
Beta could have won the consumer market in the long term, but apparently there were too many valid reasons for it not to work out.
Re:Model T Ford (Score:5, Insightful)
The market chooses what the market WANTS.
According to some definitions of product, including the "whole product" idea used in the article, a "good product" is a product that matches the market demands.
In that sense, the "best product" is the one that gives the market what it wants, and by the nature of the market, the dominant players tend to do that in a free market.
That doesn't mean the product is "better" from a technical, moral, or whatever other point of view you want, except from the point of view that it meets the desires of consumers.
The consumers might want inefficient vehicles, lousy paperback novels, kitschy pop culture or education aimed at the attention span of a 3-year-old on a glucose overdose. That doesn't mean that they're better vehicles, literature, culture or education, but if the public is more willing to pay for those, by definition they're better "products".
Re:Model T Ford (Score:2)
But the article claimed exactly that. The article claimed that it was the best because it was the most popular.
Re:Model T Ford (Score:2)
When making qualitative comparisons, it's important to remember the standards under which you make the comparison. The article does not challenge the conclusions of the comparison that received wisdom provides, it challenges the standards of that comparison as irrelevant.
Re:What you know vs. What you need (Score:2)
Every one of those features is quite expensive, hardware and software-wise, and at the prohibitive cost of a basic workstation running on the single-digit Mhz, any of those ideas was a joke.
Why do they want them now?
Have they been educated, persuaded, or contaminated by relentless marketing? Have they found new uses for the technology? Perhaps only now do we have the expertise or the technical hardware to exploit them?
Even today, it's not that clear that they are "good" features for what were doing in 1985 with computers.
- Do we really need hardware-accelerated GUIs with 3D capabilities to create Excel spreadsheets? Is that Gouraud shading on the bar chart REALLY important?
- Sure, pre-emptive multitasking is a good idea from an operating systems POV. But in 1985 that was the wrong POV to take for personal computers. There were little resources for an OS to manage, and multitasking is a concept that costed too much in a single-user machine and most users don't grasp. The typical user that drives the market still works on a single document/task at a time.
- Multi-channel digital is still an unprofessional annoyance in office workstations, as anyone who drank coffee to the sound of 50 "Windows Start-up Chimes" at 7:00AM knows, or typed a report to the not-so-muted-headphone sound of a neighbor's latest kazaa find. The ability to include annoying MIDI music in a Powerpoint presentation may not compensate that...
The point is that these features are "good" for things that didn't exist in 1985, because they either were not possible, or the ideas that put them to use were in embryonic state:
- Digital sound beyond the warning beeps of the BIOS required special hardware to play and special software to process. This was developed in other markets, for other markets, before it found any use in the mainstream, and then it required a lot of other things to fall into place. It couldn't happen without computer games, but also it couldn't have happened inthe mainstream without the "multimedia" idea, which couldn't have happened without CD-ROMs among the masses AND without hyperlinked documents AND without hardware-accelerated GUIs.
Only then did the product make sense.
- GUIs as we know them couldn't take off, I believe, without the desktop publishing revolution, and the desktop publishing revolution couldn't take off without the primitive GUIs that promised, but didn't quite give what was needed for that. Until desktop publishing changed what "creating a document in the computer" implied, GUIs were not such an amazing product, much less the idea of hardware-accelerating them. In the terms of the article, it took some time to make complex GUIs a "whole product".
- Pre-emptive multitasking was demanded by the market when it became useful. They needed no education for that, although they may have used the less technical term "Calculator shouldn't freeze this crap, and make me lose my work in 7 other apps". Sure, it was delivered late and buggy, but they weren't promising it since the days of OS/2 development because of the nicety of their hearts. They didn't promise it when people didn't care about it, because they could never create a document using 7 applications at the same time before.
Re:Model T Ford (Score:3, Funny)
Seen on McDonald's french fries:
America's favorite fries!*
* by sales volume.
Re:Model T Ford (Score:3, Informative)
Ugh.
Here's my summary of the article (deep embedded wisdom and all) in one million words or less:
People don't buy things to *have* things, people buy things to *do* stuff. Focus on letting them do stuff.
For example: I got into the IS/IT business practically by accident because I've been spending 5-10 hours a day with computers every day since I wrote my first AppleBASIC programs in junior high school. For me, this is a hobby, a pastime, what I think about first in the morning and last at night (other than my wife, of course). For me, the point of having a home network with a fast internet connection is having the home network with the fast internet connection. I guess I'm like a plumber who's *really* *into* connecting pipes together; I could give a rat's ass about what comes out of the faucet - that's the water company's problem.
As a result, when I've gotten bored with my current stable of computer toys I do surprisingly little with my PC every day: I check my email, I read
If I had the money, I'm the guy that would have bought Betamax, but I am not most people.
Now, let's say I had a friend named Bob, so has a different hobby... for example... say... collecting transvestite GI-Joe action figures. Before 1995 Bob's life is an isolated wasteland. In fact, if transvestite GI-Joes carry any significant weight in determining how he goes about the process of living, then he is quite likely the only guy in town he can relate to. PERIOD.
Since the proliferation of the internet and community communication services like AOL, however, Bob has found an entire universe of people out there who not only share his peculiar action-figure interest, but are into even weirder things he likes such as writing religeous haiku about TV anchorwoman and investigative reporter Paula Zahn.
Bob is a VHS buyer.
For him, $22.95/month for access to AOL's lame chat rooms is a way around the inherent unfairness in the universe that left religiously poetic transvestite-GI-Joe-loving Paula Zahn fans too geographically scattered to have any sort of imapact, especially during the 60's, when they *really* could have done some damage. For him, the computer is incidental; it's a tool to another end. If Guatemalan-Death-Lizard owners could find and communicate with other Guatemalan-Death-Lizard owners for free using a toaster, they'd have one in every room of their houses.
Having never made a mistake myself... (Score:2)
oh, wait... dammit all I DID make a mistake once!
dammit all to heck and back.
NOW NOW (Score:2)
The funny thing is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The funny thing is... (Score:4, Funny)
I mean, if the subject matter involves "Duplicate" and "VHS", you figure a law got broken somewhere.
Ah, but where does that leave. . . (Score:2)
Your post alone has served to convince me that we not only need a +1 troll rating, but might well need a +1 redundant as well.
KFG
I think we've seen this somewhere before... (Score:3, Interesting)
This just in!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
At least, that's what they say in the FAQ. I suggest the people that whine about dupes read it. Heck, if it's a dupe story, don't read it. You've already read it. Go to next story. Big whooping deal.
It's not like all the slashdot stories reside in databases on OUR systems. It's their database. If they want to have redundant data in it (a.k.a. dupe stories), let them.
slashdot should be renamed... (Score:2)
And why is the html validator on w3.org blocked?
J.
Great! (Score:2, Interesting)
history repeatimg (Score:4, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:2)
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:3, Funny)
Guess you don't post there, huh?
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:3, Insightful)
In this article the author is trying to claim that the percieved wisdom of Betamax being "better" (instance #2) is wrong, which makes for a decent opening, but is still incorrect. On the grounds that they have chosen to disprove Betamax is still better, as it is the superior technical format. All they have done is claimed that VHS has added value to the consumer that makes it more desirable and thus "better" (instance #1). Not exactly a complex argument that requires more than a few sentences.
Interestingly enough what it really attempts to do is prove the same form of common wisdom that the article is so intent on claiming is true. Afterall, who hasn't known that VHS succeeded because it had more tapes available to rent and held more?
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:4, Insightful)
Kuro5hin is chock-a-block full of flamebait articles - it's purpose is to incite pointless psuedo-intellectual pissing contests.
Slashdot's purpose is to provide links to news and articles of interest - if you want to discuss them here you can.
Slashdot is phenomenally popular because it provides something that huge numbers of people want.
Kuro5hin isn't, because it doesn't.
You may think your argument is exactly the same as the one being made in the article, but your argument is a bloody stupid one, and totally irellevant to the discussion.
Why not just piss off back to K5 and have an 'intellegant' discussion or whatever it is you think you're doing.
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:2)
And slashdot isn't? Oh, it's only pretentious if it's politics or literature or history, but never technology, right? Heh.
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:2)
Building off of your comment more people go to Slashdot because more people go to Slashdot. This is a very reasonable assumption and it follows that the opposite is true: less people go to Kuro5hin because less people go to Kuro5hin. Due to the greater number of users it can be assumed that the more users you have, the greater the possibility of trolls, poorly-informed rants, me toos, first posts, etc. Thus due to having fewer members Kuro5hin will be the superior site since everyone knows that Slashdot is better.
Popularity, at least in this form, can be shown (poorly and with irregular and spurious logic) to degrade the quality and produce an inferior product while still maintaining the idea that it is superior.
Re:Ethnocentrism (Score:3, Interesting)
The Beta VCR, Linux, and Apple fans say a cooperative strategy of mutually refusing to confess is the best strategy that maximizes the cumulative outcome of everyone. But this article and most consumers evaluate the "whole product" of confession and incarceration, realizing that they are better off confessing no matter what their associate does, and goes out to buy Office XP.
stupid mozilla filling in subject lines automatica (Score:2)
Re:Perhaps this article can also explain (Score:2)
Of course, slashdot is better than cureophin because I can actually remember how to spell slashdot
Okay its a dupe but (Score:2)
Suggested Reactions to dupes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Suggested Reactions to dupes (Score:2)
Why not solve the problem? (Score:2)
Further proof that the weakest link is still the human.
Of dupes and such (Score:2)
People might argue that removing the article would be censorship, but odds are, any new good ideas will be obscured by trolls and crap. These stories only waste resources and mod points.
No wonder! (Score:2)
I'll be looking into my local outlet every few days, I can tell you that much...
Vindication at last!!!
A lesson the Linux worlds needs to learn (Score:2)
Linux is doomed to be a niche player until this fact is more widely accepted. It doesn't matter what geeks think about the product if the end user is not satisfied, overjoyed even.
As it is today, woe to any newbie who wants to jump on the linux bandwagon; all they get is name calling and static when they have real problems. The overall experience can be very unpleasant.
another chance to debunk this ignorant article (Score:2, Interesting)
Schofield seems to think that the incredibly obvious and oft-repeated arguments he presents have some relevance in evaluating the beliefs of people who think Beta was superior to VHS. He doesn't present a survey of the beliefs of these people, so I'll have to go with my own experiences, which in every instance contradict Schofield's view.
Schofield's insight mostly boils down to the obvious fact that the product that won was the one that on the whole was preferable to consumers. No Beta advocate could possibly dispute that. Nonetheless, there is actual substance to the claim that Beta was superior to VHS. People who preferred Beta did so on the basis of particular attributes that were important to them, and that were demonstrably superior in Beta. "Technical superiority" is a fair characterization of these attributes, and is clearly the point people are making when they say or write that Beta was better than VHS.
Schofield's condescending and infantile tone aside, his argument has no demonstrable substance. For whatever reason, he chooses not to understand the trivial and obviously factual point made by people who point out that Beta was (at least in many important respects) technically superior to VHS. Does he really think that Betamax advocates think Beta offered a better "whole product" than VHS? That seems unlikely. My guess is that he wanted to write that pointing out Beta's technical superiority is beside the point. But it makes better headlines to say something is a myth than to say it's beside the point, especially since not everyone cares what Jack Schofield thinks the point is. The fact that he has to create a straw man in order to do so seems not to worry him.
His argument is akin to pointing out that someone who says Shawn Bradley is a very tall center is missing the point. Obviously, commenting on Shawn Bradley's height is not the best way of assessing his talents as a center. But when I say he's tall, I mean he's tall. If I wanted to comment on his value as a center, I'd do that. If Schofield wants to argue that someone has a "failure to understand how technology markets work," then he should find a claim about technology markets. The claim that Beta was technically superior to VHS is not one.
Just to be clear, I was never a Beta advocate. I did have both kinds of machines when I was younger, and on the whole I would have been happier had Beta won, but my comments are not motivated by any history of rabid advocacy. On the whole, I couldn't care less than I do about VCR tape formats. But I do get a little upset now and then when ignorant people abuse their soapboxes to mock folks with more reasonable and well supported views.
Popularity and quality are two different things (Score:2, Insightful)
The intelligent thing to do is simply to point out that VHS was more popular than betamax. The mistake is to confuse popularity with quality. They are actually two different things.
Isn't that the point of the common wisdom? (Score:2)
Of course, the wisdom imagines a semi-mythical time when neither technology was developed into a product; people don't wish that 1-hour tapes had won the market, they wish that Beta encoding had won, either by being marketted more effectively, or even simply by being used in VHS recorders. The real question is not why consumers buy technologically inferior but more suitable products, it's why more suitable products are made with inferior technology; the answer is that the wrong company owns the wrong technology.
A request for trolling (Score:5, Interesting)
Ever see the movie.... (Score:5, Funny)
Ever think you were in it?
Ever think the slashdot moderators were in it?
Re:Ever see the movie.... (Score:2)
Jokes aside, the groundhog day is one of my favorite movies, even tho it's a very strange one... it sure reflects the reality here on Slashdot, when you wake up a day and run to your browser in the morning just to check out the latest headlines, and being sure you already knew them
Weak arguements (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Weak arguements (Score:2)
Dear /. editors (Score:4, Informative)
Here is a crash course tutorial on how not to repeat stories on Slashdot. This tutorial comes FREE(as in beer) of cost !
1. After you have decided on the story, point your URL to http://slashdot.org [slashdot.org].
2. Scroll down to the bottom of the page you see.
3. Locate the text box on the left. Make sure that there is a button titled "Search" on to it's right.
4. Choose some keywords from the article, and type them out in the text box. If you need a tutorial on how to select keywords, quit this job.
5. Now click the search button and wait for the results. Among the results, see if any articles have been posted before.
Yes, it's that simple ! Example query listing is here [slashdot.org]
A better mousetrap: no keywords necessary (Score:3, Informative)
1. Copy the link location from the article being considered for posting to the front page.
2. Paste that URL into the search field.
3. Post story if and only if no result pops up.
No need for keywords, no extraneous results.
lies filthy lies (Score:2)
nay, the light shall not come Ð a future of agreeance is shrouded like the chunky thighs of an overweight nun.
when, peace, when? when shall both be valid choices and the need for absolue superiority fade away into a tepid pool of lukewarm gellato?
To illustrate (Score:2, Funny)
Bollocks (Score:3, Interesting)
This is classic Urban Myth revisionism: the writer gets his kicks by simply labelling any common, but old and hard to prove if you weren't there, knowledge as "an Urban Myth" and then sells it to gullible editors.
Complete crap from start to end, just like his insane assertion that the PC was better than the alternatives - what a toss-pot.
TWW
Re:Bollocks (Score:2, Informative)
My understanding (and recollection) of the situation was that, in general, Beta had slightly better picture quality, but VHS had longer recording times. It seems plausible that people would think that better recording times were more important than better picture quality; and that the "better" format did win.
At any rate BOTH of them suck in picture quality and better choices have been available for more than 10 years. Laser Disks have much better picture quality than VHS or Beta tapes, but nobody bought them. Super VHS is much better than VHS or Beta, but not many people were willing to pay more for it. I stopped renting VHS tapes more than 10 years ago due to the poor quality of the video (and especially sound); I was lucky enough to be able to rent laser disks instead. I should also point out that people are still renting tapes, even though DVDs are way better.
By the time VHS beat Beta, there were already better formats than either VHS or Beta, so I am not sure that there are any lessons to be learned other than the mass market doesn't care much about quality. The "best" product does win in the market place; it is just that the "quality" of the various choices does not have a very large weighting factor in the overall judgment.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Bollocks (Score:2)
When Beta launched to could record 2hrs which was enough for most movies at the time and it later extended beyond 3hrs. I don't think this was as important as the cost.
It was originally incapable of being used to tape anything much longer than Seinfeld, and at its peak managed to record no more than about an hour.
How do you think video rental places worked with Beta?
TWW
Re: (Score:2)
Why the Dupe is better than the Original! (Score:2)
2) Like repeating the 3rd grade, we already know the material and feel 'smart'.
3) We get to make offtopic posts without taking as big a karma hit.
4) We get to make offtopic posts without taking as big a karma hit. (ooops! sorry for the dupe!)
Send us your Linux Sysadmin [librenix.com] articles.!
What decision? (Score:3, Insightful)
Freedom to choose hasn't occurred yet.
He is saying the popular device is the better device, Which is better ? A Toyota or a Aston Martin? Well they sure do sell allot more Toyotas.
Dr. Pangloss would have loved this (Score:2)
The secondary arguments are risible. The thing about how technology doesn't matter comes quickly (second sentence) to:
Translation: Compact Cassette was here first, and had time to saturate the market next to its competition back then, so it's a better "whole product" because it's got all the infrastructure to support it.
By that way of thinking, gasoline is a better whole product than anything that might try to replace it, isn't it? And hey, examining how the car manufacturors crushed urban rail systems, that's not important -- the "whole product" of cars was better, so we couldn't possibly learn anything about urban planning decisions and how to prevent abuses in future, now, could we?
I'd hate to see this guy doing history. Everything happened because it was for the best... it was all just inevitable, and pay no attention to all those people who had to struggle to get things done.
If I never hear this again I... (Score:2, Insightful)
OK, this is getting out of hand... (Score:2)
One suggestion, one conspiracy comment. (Score:2)
Here's the conspiracy comment: considering the number of people that comment on a duplicate story (just to bitch about it being a dupe), Slashdot gets the ad-eyballs with very little effort. There is a built-in impetus to post duplicates to stir traffic. It's a delicate balance but my guess is that they elected timothy to be the dupe-poster and to manage the flow of dupe postings.
And, I'll probably repost this with each dupe. At least each timothy dupe.
Proof! (Score:2)
flawed logi c (Score:2)
In a sense, it's really a variation the Prisoner's Dilemma - should I choose what's best for ME if it's going to screw the next guy?
Well - if you ALWAYS choose the dominant market player, and if everyone does that, the dominant market player soon becomes the ONLY market player - then everybody gets screwed (except the vendor), because just because a company has the theoretical resources to create a "best of breed" product, does not mean that they'll sink those resources into doing it.
An alternate argument could be - if you're a believer in Capitalism, you must accept that Monopolies are fundamentally opposed to the theory behind why Capitalism is a great system. (because competition is what drives Vendors to produce the best product for the marketplace, not simply having more resources). Therefore, if you're a red-blooded American, or a staunch believer in freedom and Capitalism, ALWAYS choosing the top player (whether by virtue of them just being the top player, or whether they really do offer a superior value at that point in time) is really an UnAmerican, UnPatriotic choice. One should ALWAYS consider supporting the "underdog" from time to time.
Circular reasoning... (Score:2)
I can't see why these people get paid to write.
Imagine the thought processes:
"Windows is way better that Linux, otherwise it wouldn't dominate".
"But Linux has so much better ".
"Why, yes, but as a WHOLE product, Windows is berre, otherwise it wouldn't dominate".
Can we check if this is a jonKatz troll in disguise? He's been awfully quiet, and this article has his style all over it... >:)
Re:Duplicate (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Note from the stableboy... (Score:2)
Re:duplicate post prevention (Score:2)
Re:thump thump thump (Score:2)
What kind of idiot moderator passes up a chance like I just handed out, to mod as 'redundant'...? Talk about dim witted