zlacker

>>bwb+(OP)
I wish them luck, but while saying folks will drop the dominant apps seems all the rage at the moment people have been saying this for decades with almost no real progress at scale.

The only way to accomplish this at scale is to build something that is legit better and let the market decide. Anything else is just principled wishful thinking.

>>cmiles+Tf
Products don't necessarily win on merit.

Microsoft Teams "won" entirely because it was given away free with Office. Even though it is acceptable these days, it was horrible when it started. There is no way it could have won without unlimited backing from a bigger force.

You have to see EU trying these things in the same light.

>>harikb+Ii
Sure, Betamax was technically superior to VHS. But in the end the market still decides… nobody said “better” means technically superior… just something people want to use an other options available to them. “Good enough” with attractive value to the individual/business typically wins.

>>cmiles+qj
Not to get too much into a debate about Beta vs VHS, but VHS did have longer run times and its cheapness was the main reason it won, It just fit better for the consumer overall desires at the time

>>jetbal+Wj
Exactly. It's about whose definition of "better" you use. Sony thought that a better picture would win out, and it did where that mattered: TV studios and video-journalists used Betamax until digital formats took over. For consumers, "better" meant cheaper tapes and longer run time.

JVC also licensed the VHS format to many manufacturers, so there was a lot of competition on recorders, further driving the price of ownership down. I don't recall anyone ever selling Betamax other than Sony.

Edit: JVC actually released VHS as an open standard, not a license, per Wikipedia.

>>SoftTa+Mt
Pro TV used Betacam, not Betamax. Same physical tape, but four instead of two tape heads and a much faster tape speed.