What about SACD.. you know Sony's HD Audio format that was introduced just a couple of years ago and has completely flopped and pretty much disappeared. It's pretty obvious that consumers haven't changed. If I had to guess I'd say that they're even LESS informed then they were years ago.
That's exactly why SACD failed... you had to buy more expensive Sony Brand players that only worked with amps that had multi-channel analog pre-amp inputs The whole thing was confusing for the customer and WAY more expensive then what most wanted to spend. DVD Audio and it's cousin Dual-Disc are doing well because anyone with a DVD player can enjoy them and there are no special surround sound requirements. The quality wasn't as good but there also wasn't much difference in quality. Therefore the cost and complexity differences are what made the difference to consumers.
SACD is also Philips', who together introduced the CD as well. Consumers, as a whole, are definitely not less informed (since most were not too informed in the first place), and that's not why those formats are doing poorly. Aside from the obvious reason of very limited content (in quantity and popularity), it's clear that people, in general, don't care about their audio quality as much. MP3s are becoming even more popular than CDs now even though it is a lossy compression. This is likely because audio quality isn't as discernible and also you don't have to sit down and focus on the music to enjoy it (e.g. on-the-go listening) -- noticeability and importance. Most people can perceive visual differences much more receptively than audio. Let someone listen to a CD and then an SACD of the same music and they may or may not notice a real difference. Let someone watch an SD and HD version of a video clip and they'll almost certainly notice; whether they care is another issue.
Also, the point you brought up about the equipment needed is important too. Most people don't have HDTVs yet, but it's been estimated by some analysts that approximately 25% of American TVs will be HDTVs by the end of the year.
Current pricing is not as pivotal as you think since initial adopters will buy anything (see PS3 ). This "war" is in its infancy and if either format does take off on a large scale it will be a while from now, and by that time the hardware price gap will not be as nearly as large (if it exists at all).
Are you serious?
Lets see, Memory sticks are more than double the price of any other mass Flash media type, they dont offer as large a capacity as the others do, they are much slower reading and writting. The only reason they sell at all is because you are FORCED to buy them because of sony.
Do you honnestly beleive if sony supported the other flash media types in their products anyone in there right mind would buy the memory stick? if you still have to think about it read above again. And the kicker is when Sony decieded to swtich to there new Memory stick duo format they didnt even allow support of there older memory sticks in those products. So any idiot that spend tons of cash on memory sticks had to buy them all over again if you wanted to use the new devices all thanks to Sony.
The variety of devices they're usable with?
No other company is stupid enough to support the memory stick, I can only think of one crappy Konica Minolta camera (which by the way has gone bankrupt) which accepted Memory sticks for the very reason of trying to get the people that had spend tons of money on the old memory sticks to buy the camera.
Yes, I am serious. Nice rant, but ultimately pointless since you haven't used any sales figures to dispute it. By variety I mostly meant that Sony makes a "variety" of devices in which they are usable unlike certain other formats whose uses are relatively slim. Additionally, PCs from OEMs are more often coming with Media Card Readers, which are capable of using them. Memory Stick is doing well and has lasted 8 years; get over it.
Edited by Kamasutra318, 19 June 2006 - 06:30 PM.