Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsunami
Hits the nail on the head. In the end, the product that has the lowest price, is the easiest to use or does more almost always wins, even if there are other products around that are clearly better at the task at hand.
Betamax / VHS
IDE / SCSI
USB / Firewire
Trinitron / "Bulb" tubes
IPS & (S)PVA / TN LCD-panels
Organ / Keyboard
|
No, you are missing an important factor: The "task at hand" is often not what the proponents of the failed technology think it is. This is particularly true in the case of stuff like Beta/VHS. Beta had superior image and color stability. So everyone one says it was "better." But it was never a competition for best color quality. They were not competing in the video production space.
The task at hand was, in large part, watching movies at home. An important part of that task is conveniently having a whole movie on one tape, plus home NTSC TVs usually sucked anyway, so Betamax was the INFERIOR SOLUTION for the actual task, and the one part of it's technology that made it superior was of marginalized value to the average rabbit-ear wielding TV watcher.
That's true in many cases where people claim the market chose mediocrity because of price or whatever. What it really turns out to be is that the market chose the BEST SOLUTION FOR THE TASK, even if a competing solution may have at one or two superior features.
It's also true, and not a sign of any flaw, that a product has to be affordable to succeed in the mass market, and that is often a legitimate part of the task: allow me to afford it. Now a days that is often accomplished by packing high-end features in to cheap, poorly made disposable products. Back in the pre-globalization days, it often meant keep the build quality up, compromise in the features and technology.