Posts Tagged betamax

Betamax to Blu-ray: Famous format wars

Posted by on Wednesday, 11 August, 2010

Betamax to Blu-ray: Famous format wars
True stories of tech’s bloodiest format wars Posted by Chris Smith
Read more on T3

Clear iSpot – WiFi Hotspot For Apple Products
Clearwire has introduced their Clear iSpot, a mobile hotspot device that allows tablet computers and other handheld devices to connect to the Internet at 4G network speeds. The device has been specifically designed for Apple gadgets like the iPhone, iPod Touch and the iPad and once a wireless network connection has been established, these devices [...]
Read more on Coated

Please Stay Healthy, Troy Polamalu
As good as Troy Polamalu played opening week last season (he was all over the field!), I really believe this 2010 Steelers team can be special as long as Troy can avoid the injury bug. I see upgrades at the following positions: O-Line Coach Kugler is a scary dude … and his players are learning this about him real fast! These guys are huge and strong players who were playing a girly game (Chad …
Read more on Bleacher Report


Orson Welles and His Brief Passionate Betacam Love Affair

Posted by on Friday, 18 December, 2009

In January 1985, the phone rang. The caller announced that he was Orson Welles and that he wanted to have lunch with me. Thus began one of the most extraordinary and bittersweet adventures of my life.

Sometimes the journeys we take through this life begin and end in the most unexpected ways. My encounter with Welles in the last days of his life centered on a common interest: Sony’s new one-piece camcorder, the Betacam. It had just come to market and Welles, always the genius filmmaker, had big ideas for what he could do with one. With Welles there were no limits. “You can’t do that” wasn’t in his vocabulary. This was a short, but very passionate story.

At the time I was running Television Matrix, a small video production facility in the Sunset-Gower Studios in Hollywood. I had been in California only a short time, having moved from Miami the previous summer. I had started in video production in 1975 and had been shooting mostly news for the networks throughout Latin America. Business was good because the networks were switching from film to tape in this period and they were short of video crews. In late 1982, I purchased something totally new—one of the first Sony Betacams delivered in the United States.

Beta Goes To Hollywood

One of our clients in Miami had been Entertainment Tonight. During a lull in a location shoot with Robin Leach, then an ET correspondent, I’d shown him the new Betacam. Leach had been offered a chance to do his own television show, but could find no one in the mid-1980s who could bring in a one-hour episode for his very low budget of $100,000. The Betacam, Leach thought, might be the answer.

“Could this work?” he asked me at the time. “Maybe,” I responded. Only the Sony Betacam camcorder—the first one-piece camera and recorder ever made—and a standalone player existed. To edit, one would need to connect the player to another format to finish the work. That would mean integration with a one-inch Type C format system.

Leach made me an offer. If I could figure out how to make all the technology work, he would move me and my crews to LA to do the production on his new reality show. That motivated me to call Charles Felder, then the president of the tiny Sony Broadcast office in New York. My timing couldn’t have been better. It turns out that Sony had the same thoughts about how to extend the Betacam and I had brought them the right project at the right moment. In a flash, we made a deal. In exchange for a small financial investment on my part, Sony would build an experimental facility in LA. They would make it a “first” that they’d advertise and show to others in Hollywood.

The Hottest Video Editing Suite in Town

The prospects were exciting for everyone. An elated Robin Leach began to plan for the new show, and I, along with several freelance crew members that I had worked with, moved to Los Angeles in the summer of 1984. One of the reasons we picked the Sunset-Gower lot (the old Columbia Pictures Studios) was it housed the broadcast center for the 1984 Olympics in LA that summer. When the Olympics ended, the networks would have a huge fire sale of their used broadcast equipment on the same lot. I had targeted the pieces we needed in advance, bought the gear, and moved it to our new edit bay days after the games ended.

We were lucky enough to hire Jim Fancher, now chief science officer at Technicolor in Hollywood, to build the facility. He was far more than a brilliant engineer. As a hands-on “can do” guy, he was also a natural-born negotiator who could coordinate the different technical approaches of companies whose gear would not work together. I will always picture Jim lying on his back under a rack of gear talking with tech support at some company about why their product wouldn’t work.

Somehow, thanks to Jim, it all came together on time and on budget. By fall, we were ready. The show, now called Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous, went on the air. To be honest, I thought it was dumb idea that would last for one season if we were lucky. All I really cared about was that we had moved to Los Angeles and that Leach had paid for everything. I was ready for whatever came next. I can honestly say it was one of the great shocks of my life when the show became a major hit. I was totally unready for it.

We had built the first interformat edit bay in the nation (Betacam to one-inch), and Lifestyles was the first major magazine show to be shot using the new format. We had made history. The cost of television production had come down—way down. At least by half. Word spread fast and we were running facility tours in no time. Sony even hired Milton Berle to do a two-page ad for the facility and the technology concept behind it.

Enter Orson

A freelance editor for our show, Paul Hunt, also did some sound work for the legendary actor/director/producer/genius Orson Welles. He told Welles about our Betacam facility, now running almost around the clock, and from that moment on the great man’s insatiable curiosity about every new sound and imaging technology took over. Welles wanted to meet me, and thus came a lunch invitation many film buffs would have died for.

To be honest, I knew very little about Welles. I had majored in television and radio at the University of South Carolina in the 1960s and it was hard to escape the many contributions Welles made to the broadcast and film industries. From audio special effects to remarkable moving dolly shots, Welles was a genius of the first order. But outside of having seen Citizen Kane, I didn’t know the details of his career nor did I pretend to.

Our first lunch at Welles’ favorite haunt, Ma Maison, was a roaring success. For reasons I still don’t fully understand, we hit it off. Welles was curious about all things video, especially the Betacam, a device he envisioned to be an Arriflex camera that didn’t need film. As our first meeting continued, Welles’ small dog, who was seated at the table next to me, kept nipping at my leg. It was annoying, but I didn’t dare take a swat at Orson Welles’ beloved dog!

That lunch led to many others throughout 1985. In the earlier days of our relationship, he tested me in strange ways. One night, after midnight, Orson (he insisted that everyone call him Orson) called to ask for help in solving a sound problem he claimed to be having. He was recording and editing some narration on his Nagra tape recorder in his bedroom in the hills above Hollywood Blvd.

“Frank, after I do a splice with a razor blade, I get a bump in the sound when I play back the tape. What should I do?” he asked. This was a very strange question from the man who had practically invented modern sound recording. He had scared the nation with War of the Worlds and was asking me such a basic question about audio editing. Though half asleep, I knew he had to know the answer and instantly recognized it as some sort of test.

“Orson, your razor blade is magnetized. Get another one,” I answered. “Oh, OK,” he responded, apologizing for waking me and then promptly said goodbye. I went back to sleep and never heard of the issue again.

“Call Sony. Make It Work!”

As he learned more about video camcorders and nonlinear editing, Orson became determined to do a video project of his own. We visited New England Digital for a demo of nonlinear sound editing on the Synclavier. As for video, Orson wasn’t content with just renting a Montage, one of the first non-linear video editors. He wanted his own, and he wanted it to sit next to his flatbed film editor at home.

As the talk turned to money (it always did in Orson’s case), I offered to contribute video facilities and help him raise money for a one-man show to be called Orson Welles Solo. The production would be a retrospective of Orson’s favorite theatrical material along with a big dose of magic—both new tricks and archival footage from Orson’s glory days as a working magician. Our facility was already booked around the clock, but it didn’t stop me from promising Orson anything he wanted.

Through a long and convoluted series of events (and with the help of the late Paul Rothchild, producer of The Doors, the Paul Butterfield Blues Band and Janis Joplin), the money was raised and the production was set to begin. Now Orson focused on how he’d use the two Betacams we’d secured to shoot the show.

Just as he had accepted no conventional technical limitations when he made Citizen Kane in 1940, Orson approached video in the same unrelenting way. In 1985, Betacams had Saticon tubes—not CCD sensors—and their ability to sync to one another via time code was, to put it mildly, a bit crude. Orson didn’t care. He demanded that the handheld Betacams float around the set wirelessly and always be in perfect sync. He also directed that we shoot directly into bright lights and he didn’t want to hear about any problems with lag.

“Call Sony and tell them to make it work,” Orson demanded, slamming his fist on a table at one point. “Don’t ever tell me ‘No.’” I called Sony, and Sony responded by sending two expert engineers to help Orson push the video envelope on the project.

The day before the shoot was to begin in November, 1985, the Betacams were tweaked to the max. The jury-rigs—and there were a lot of them—were tested and re-tested. Every engineer and crew member that was to be in Orson’s field of view was told that the words “you can’t do that” were to be stricken from their vocabulary. With this project, I demanded, we will find a way to do any and everything Orson wants to do. All the old excuses about the limits of video will be left at the front door.

On the Evening Before the Big Shoot

As technical preparations for the shoot continued, Orson taped an appearance in the late afternoon on Merv Griffin’s syndicated talk show. Normally, Orson disdained conversations about his past. He’d always say he wanted to talk about the future, not “go down memory lane.” But, uncharacteristically, he did go down memory lane that afternoon with his old friend, Merv. Orson charmed the audience, both with stories and card tricks.

After the show, Orson had dinner at Ma Maison and then headed home to finish writing the script for our first taping, now only hours away. Our first day of shooting was to be in auditorium on the UCLA campus. Orson would call when he was ready for us to go to the location.

The next morning, as I awaited those instructions from Orson in my office, the phone rang. It was Paul Rothchild.

“Did you hear the news,” he asked gently.

“What news?” I replied.

“Orson Welles is dead.”

Orson had died of a heart attack during the night. He was found slumped over his typewriter, working on our script. Minutes later, a Welles assistant called and said bluntly: “Frank, the project has been canceled.”

Welles’ Legacy and Love of New Technology

I drove home—numb and unable to function. After the initial days of despair, my incredible year working with Orson Welles took on a new dimension. A new journey would begin. Those same Betacams were used to record Orson’s memorial service a few weeks later and that event, in turn, introduced me to the remarkable men and women who had been associated with Welles from his days with the Mercury Theater. The film critic Leonard Maltin and I did a documentary with these fascinating people, and I later produced, with Mercury Theater actor Richard Wilson, a retrospective of Orson’s best radio work from his personal tape collection.

A couple of weeks after Orson’s death, his cinematographer, the late Gary Graver, came by my office for a visit. Gary said something I will never forget.

“I’ve been driving around for two weeks with Orson’s ashes in the truck of my car,” he said, matter of factly.

“What?” I responded, quickly envisioning a fender bender with the Hollywood legend’s ashes being scattered across an LA freeway.

“I’m not going to take them into my house,” Graver said, almost fearing the prospect. “What should I do?”

I thought for a minute, looked a Graver, and said, “I don’t know.” Some months later, Welles’ ashes were buried in Ronda, Spain, on the property of a longtime friend, retired bullfighter Antonio Ordóñez.

The demise of our video project left me yearning to do some kind of major Welles project to fill the void. As I reviewed our time together, I recalled an extraordinary story that Welles had taken nearly two hours to tell me on a leisurely Saturday afternoon a few months earlier. It was about the events surrounding his production of Marc Blitzstein’s musical, The Cradle Will Rock, in 1937. It was, Welles told me, the only time in U.S. history that the military was sent out to shut down a Broadway play. He wanted to make a movie about it, but had failed to raise the money.

That was it. I would try to get the film made. It took the support of many of Welles’ original Mercury colleagues—including the late actor/producer John Houseman—and a lot of crazy investors to keep the project alive over the years. Most importantly, it took Tim Robbins, who recognized the power of the story early on and spent most of 1990s writing and directing the film that eventually came to the screen.

Houseman once said that it’s rare in this life to be touched by real genius. Welles, said Houseman, was the real thing—perhaps the only real genius he’d ever known. Now, I understand what he meant. Welles, long before most filmmakers, saw the powerful potential of small format video. Yet, he was perhaps 20 years too early to enjoy the real fruits of the video revolution in his own work.

Whenever I see a tiny new camcorder introduced, or see Apple upgrade a revolutionary application like iMovie, I think of Orson. Oh, how excited he’d be. The pure magic of it all! If he were alive today, he’d be making his movies without regard to raising huge amounts of money. That, for both Orson and his audience, would be an achievement that we’ll never be able to enjoy.

Frank Beacham is a New York City-based independent writer at www.beachamjournal.com. Beacham was executive producer of the 1999 Touchstone Films release of Tim Robbins film, Cradle Will Rock. He and George Demas have written Maverick, a new play based on the events described in this story.

Top CC image from Scary Cow/Flickr; shot of Orson with camera from MovieMail, which sells the brilliant latter-day Welles documentary F for Fake.


Can New Forms of Media Distribution Save Porn?

Posted by on Sunday, 22 November, 2009

mailman

Porn is all about instant gratification. A business reliant on bringing its customers the goods fast, this industry has always had a history of being on the forefront of new technologies as they emerge for better products and faster distribution. Revolutionizing porn and how its enjoyed with the adoption of the VHS home video, the porn industry grew from a seedy underground sex scene into a $10 billion dollar a year business. Nowadays, the very same industry that once helped mainstream VHS win the battle against Betamax in the 70s and 80s, is facing the problem of staying relevant in today’s “I need it NOW” society. Porn, one of the earliest adopters of e-commerce and Internet broadcasting, is being threatened by the very instant gratification that has made it so profitable. Torrents and free video sites have seriously threatened the porn industry’s business model. Now anyone with a web cam and computer can be a porn star on the Internet. Are people willing to pay for porn anymore? What is the porn industry doing to set themselves apart from all the amateur porn makers out there? Looking towards future tech like mobile streaming, smart phone apps, and instant downloads to VOD systems, porn leaders are changing their business model in an attempt to stay relevant and profitable.

Sony’s Betamax video format was introduced in 1975, to be followed by JVC’s VHS a year later. Arguably a better video format, Betamax never took off much in part thanks to the porn industry’s involvement with the distribution and sale of VHS videotapes. It was said that porn was scarcely available on Betamax, possibly because of Sony’s stance against its production. On the other hand, porn was readily available on VHS because it was a cheaper medium for distribution, ultimately helping VHS win the battle over betamax in late 1980s. Offering consumers affordable movies to rent and movies to own, VHS helped build porn into a $10 billion dollar industry, and it made porn an at-home experience rather than forcing the consumer to visit a strip club, peep show, or adult movie theater. Enter the Internet and e-commerce in 1995, and the low-cost DVD in 2001, porn was becoming cheaper, more available, and easier to duplicate. File sharing became common place and the very technology that had made porn available to the masses both online and for rent threatened to take down the entire industry. Another threat that arose was the celebrity standard: the homemade sex tape. In a world where anyone can make a porno or be a porn star (re: Paris Hilton, Carrie Prejean, Pamela Anderson), how can porn as an industry compete? Porn producers have been forced to adopt higher production value and find new ways to reach their audience aside from the standard pay-per view or DVD model.

One new frontier in their quest for profitability is HD video. Consumers love seeing their favorite porn stars in HD because it makes them feel like they’re a part of the action more than ever before. Porn stars on the other hand? Not so much. Time to bust out the HD makeup. The same porn actresses that made seedy sexy, are being held to a higher Hollywood standard now that they’re in HD. Aside from new makeup, lighting, and post production techniques, porn directors like “Joone” are giving porn stars tips to stay HD ready, “I tell the girls to work out more, cut down on the carbs, hit the treadmill.” In an industry that made bleach blond, super tan, and “realistic” action from every angle the norm, could porn become more like a Hollywood film? Does this mean the end of hardcore as we know it with a movement towards over produced soft core style hardcore scenes in an attempt to set themselves apart from the amateur porn film makers? Aside from that – higher production costs also mean that porn is going to get pricey and no one wants to pay for pricey adult entertainment when you can get a fix for free online.

Aside from pursuing HD and better production value, porn makers are looking for new ways to monetize their product. One way they’re doing this is by jumping on the Video on Demand trend. Video on Demand is not new when it comes to porn, but it is becoming more athe norm when it comes to renting and viewing adult content movies online and on your TV. Creating online adult channels through VOD systems like Vudu, porn makers are breaking into VOD for instant distribution. Although, porn has not been fully integrated into the VOD scene. Companies like Sony aim to bar porn’s entry into VOD markets especially when it comes to Playstation 3. Aside from VOD, porn producers are looking to cash in on smartphones, iPhones, iPod Touch, and game consoles that can stream media or download media. Catering to the mobile phone industry are prepackaged micro SD cards that store porn to be viewed on any smart phone or computer. Social media such as Twitter and Facebook have also revolutionized the conversation around porn. Once a dirty secret, Twitter users such as @AdultNewsWire aggregate porn news and spit it out to their list of followers to create an actual conversation around porn and its lovers. There are also the hard-to-find adult video games that always aim to titillate an adult gamer like Bonetown for instance, which featured a cameo by larger than life porn legend Ron Jeremy. Once an industry that had enough power to sway an entire nation towards VHS technology, the porn industry is now struggling to stay in front of new technological trends. Some may argue that technology has grown too big for the porn industry. But is the produced porn industry relevant when there is so much porn available online for free? The majority of us don’t really pay for porn anymore. If I wanna watch porn, I am probably going to go to a free site like RedTube or YouPorn for my fix. But then again I’m not too picky. However, the less technologically savvy or more old school consumer who are more willing to pay for their porn, will play a big part in keeping the porn industry alive. But between the new way and old way of getting your fix, as long as porn production companies stay ahead of the curve (no pun intended) with new distribution and sharing trends that keep these companies relevant in how entertainment is enjoyed, then porn as an industry will be just fine.


Guest columnist Lydia Leavitt writes about sex and, oddly enough, social media. For more information on the latest intimate technology, check out 69adget.com.



Top five vintage tech gadgets that need reviving – Dansette, Psion Five, Squarial and more

Posted by on Thursday, 22 October, 2009

This got the Tech Digest team thinking. What other great brands and products from the past are worth reviving? So here are five that we think ought to be given a second chance. We certainly aren’t saying that you should ditch your Blu-ray for a Betamax, but given the right techy makeover these products could be very now.


The Dirty Backstabbing Mess Called Betamax vs VHS

Posted by on Friday, 17 July, 2009

You think you enjoyed Blu-ray vs HD DVD? Memory Stick vs SD? Pshaw! You haven’t seen a format war until you’ve witnessed the betrayal and bloodbath that was Betamax vs VHS.

Sony was supposed to win this. The company made magnetic tape out of like paper and mud back in the 1940s, turned out a “pocketable” transistor radio in the 1950s, and invented the “portable” television by 1960. They had their first video tape recorder by 1963. They weren’t the only ones, but they were among the first and best.

The so-called VTR business had a rocky start. The things were hulking bastards, with huge price tags and poor recording capability.

A company called Ampex put out the first “home entertainment” VTR in 1963, only it cost $30,000 in the Neiman Marcus Christmas catalog, and was nicknamed Grant’s Tomb because the product manager who thought it up was going to be shoved inside by the company’s accountants. (He would have fit, too, the thing was so big.) Sony comes along in the middle of that decade and puts out a $1,200 “portable” VTR that came with a leatherette case and its own TV. It still weighed 65 pounds.

The worst part about these 1960s VTRs was that they were basically reel-to-reel—you had to thread your own 1-inch videotape through spools and stuff, and by the end of the decade, a one-hour spool of tape was like 8 inches in diameter. Can you imagine your TiVo needing 180 spools of videotape to get the job done?

As Sony toiled on the videotape problem, Matsushita—who we now call Panasonic—and its independent subsidiary JVC weren’t really standing out in the VTR business. Let’s say this: Nobody would have guessed they’d be able to overthrow Sony and kick mecha ass within the decade.

However, these guys were among the biggest manufacturers, dwarfing Sony many times over. Matsushita, known for efficiency, not innovation, tended to focus on big boring appliances—TVs, refrigerators, air conditioners—with a smaller team, branded Technics, devoted to dominating the hi-fi realm. JVC was all about TVs and audio gear, and had decent video know-how.

It was Sony who solved the reel-to-reel problem with—ta daaa!—a video cassette. It was called U-Matic, and at 3/4″ thick, it was smaller than the earlier formats, but still a bit of a chunkster. Since video was a bit of a Wild West, Sony felt like it needed partners to firmly establish a format, and to avoid a format war. It asked Matsushita and JVC, who said “yes” as long as Sony adopted some changes. They key here: The partnership included a deal where everybody shared all the patents. Turns out, probably not the smartest move by Sony.

Sony was right to form a posse, though. Every single electronics maker in Japan, Europe and America was trying to build a video recorder. Some American firms were obsessed with lasers (though ironically it would later be the Dutch and Japanese firms who actually put lasers to good use); other American firms were jazzed about microfilm…for video. None of them had success. Before we get on with the story, here’s a list of totally failed video players and recorders:

• Matsushita VX-100 and VX-2000
• Matsushita AutoVision
• Toshiba/Sanyo V-Cord
• Ampex InstaVision
• MCA DiscoVision/Magnavox Magnavision
• CBS Electronic Video Recording
• RCA HoloTape
• Sears/Cartridge Television Cartrivision

See what I mean? A friggin’ mess it was.

Part of the problem was the message. Nobody knew what the hell this was all about. Sony wasn’t just a pioneer in the technology, they thought hard about how to explain why you totally desperately want something bad. At one point, Sony hired Bela Lugosi to dress up one last time as Dracula, and explain that, since he worked nights, he needed to catch up on primetime shows when he got home. Get it? Vampires—they’re out killing people when Barney Miller is playing! It was a good bit, and there were a lot more like it. Little by little, the public caught on to what VCRs were for.

Anyway, U-Matic, launched in 1971, wasn’t a runaway success, either, but it was the bestselling video recorder to date, and the first successful VCR. In the realm of pro video, it was hot. Sony cashed in by steering from the home market to the businesses but JVC, who kept trying to pitch it for home use, got hosed. Like villains in some Shakespearean play, Matsushita and JVC kinda lurked in the background, planning for the next round when they might one-up that little charmer, Sony. The name of their plot? Video Home System, which you and I call VHS.

Sony was naive. Like, crazy naive. In 1974, it asked Matsushita and JVC to partner up again, this time on a fully baked format called Betamax. They weren’t asking for intellectual collaboration, just a deal to make and sell the things. It was a nice system, with really small tapes, but the problem was, the tapes only recorded for an hour. Sony was like, “That’s not a problem,” but everyone else was like, “Yes, it is.” The would-be partners dragged their heels suspiciously, not signing any deals. Sony kinda thought that was weird, but went ahead and launched the one-hour Betamax box in 1975.

Big mistake.

Not long after Sony went into wide release with the one-hour Betamax, JVC pulled a two-hour VHS out of its butt. And in time for Christmas 1976 no less. Sony had another flash of naivete when it pressed on with the one-hour system for a while, even though it had a two-hour system in the works. In that gap, JVC and its big poppa Matsushita scored sales and recognition.

Some people say Betamax was “better” but that depends on many factors, and could very well be an urban myth. The technologies were so close Sony’s own chairman called VHS a copy of Betamax. What may have looked good in one system with certain settings might not look as good on another with different settings. And by some accounts, Betamax’s more moving parts meant they were more expensive to manufacture and more costly to maintain and repair. It’s not an open-and-shut case of quantity vs. quality. Either way you look at it, there are compromises.

By this point, it wasn’t just some anything-goes contest with a million formats. By 1976, all those above had died or were dying. In Japan, there were just two choices. The Japanese government told everyone to sort it out. Hitachi, Mitsubishi and Sharp joined Team VHS, but didn’t really move forward.

In February 1977, Sony grabbed Toshiba and Sanyo, and then signed the American powerhouse brand Zenith up for an order of Sony-made Betamaxes with the Zenith name on them. Was it going to happen for Betamax after all? Seemed like they’d finally drawn at least a few good cards from the deck.

Sony might not have been totally screwed at that moment, but there were two American powerhouses, and the other one, RCA, was undecided. Ironically, the fate of the Japanese VCR industry relied on how well it could handle the most American of sports: Football. In other words, now that both players could manage two hours of recording time, what RCA wanted was enough recording time to capture a game—three hours would do.

What transpired next is unclear. Even though, at the time, both technologies were limited to two-hour capacity, Matsushita pledged to make RCA tape machines that could record for four hours.

Was this a lie? Was it vaporware? Whatever the deal, JVC engineers pulled off a four-hour capacity six weeks later, and RCA agreed to buy 55,000 machines that year, and up to a million more in the next three years. Better yet, RCA’s SelectaVision VHS decks would cost $300 less than the two-hour Betamaxes, at $1000 a pop.

Although Betamax hung on for a bit longer, that, boys and girls, was the end of the competition. In 1979, Sony market share tilted downward, and by 1980, the jig was up for those poor bastards.

Note: I recognize that there are other issues that might have come into play here, including Universal’s lawsuit of Sony, which lead to today’s Supreme Court definition of fair-use copyright law, and the fact that some studios, including Warner, began squeezing movies onto videotape early, with varying degrees of success. However, I contend that none of that changed the outcome—the war above was fought between Sony and Matsushita, and Matsushita won.

SOURCES:
Fast Forward: Hollywood, The Japanese, and the VCR Wars – James Lardner (Special thanks to you, Jim, for chatting me through some of this)
Sony – John Nathan
The History of Television – Albert Abramson
Sony History – Sony Global Website
Made in Japan – Akio Morita
Quest for Prosperity – Konosuke Matsushita
[PDF] Case Report on Betamax – Verardi et al
“Why VHS was better than Betamax” – Guardian UK – Jack Schofield

Gizmodo ’79 is a week-long celebration of gadgets and geekdom 30 years ago, as the analog age gave way to the digital, and most of our favorite toys were just being born.