I sold both back in the early to mid 80s. When demoed side-by-side,
nearly everyone acknowledged the difference in quality of image. The
recording time difference was a factor (significant to some), but the
bigger factor, IIRC, was the price. Consumer Beta machines were about
$65-100 USD more expensive than a VHS with similar features. That was a
lot of cash at that time, especially for people who were using it to
record off-air shows. The price of movies on tape was relatively higher
then, and renting was not that convenient.
Earl
Jim Brokaw wrote:
>I remember the 'Betamax' when they first came out was highly regarded, but
>then VHS came along and promised 8 hour tapes instead of only 5 hours (or
>wias it 6?) possible on Beta. As the blank tapes were relatively costly back
>then (compared to now...) the general public went for the 'extra space for
>the same price' marketing hype, despite the widespread acknowledgement that
>the Beta format gave better quality recordings. When VHS took off it didn't
>take long for Beta to just about disappear... I think about the parallels to
>digital v/s film cameras. Digital is 'almost as good' and 'instant pictures'
>and 'essentially free' (except for the memory cards and computer equipment
>and printer, inks, etc...)
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|