DVD vs Video-on-Demand

For Module 4 I viewed Total Recall.  I viewed the movie digitally through Amazon.com’s video-on-demand.

 

The classic example of increasing returns is the Sony Betamax versus JVC VHS video tape format war.  Arguments are divided over why VHS won out.  Some argue that beta’s video quality was superior though others disagree (Scofield, 2003).  While the differences in quality were measurable in the lab, they were irrelevant on home viewing machines.  

©2010 and 2011 SimplyDV Limited (UK)

Initially Beta was the only game in town and offered more movies for rent (Scofield, 2003).  VHS offered more variety and lower price in players and many more rental titles.  The key factor in the VHS victory seems to be recording length (Owen, 2008, Scofield, 2003).  Betamax recording length was only 60 minutes, not long enough to hold a typical feature length movie.  VHS tapes recording length was three hours.  In European markets recoding length was less of an issue (3 hours 35 minutes versus 4 hours) with price playing a key role on the European front (Scofield, 2003).  

© Associated Newspapers Ltd

DVDs versus Blu-ray is a better example of increasing returns than DVDs versus video-on-demand.  They are similar technologies as were Betamax and VHS.  Similarly Blu-ray offers better video and audio quality and special features.  But they are more expensive and fewer titles are available.  You also need a Blu-ray player. DVDs can play in a Blu-ray player, but not vice versa.  With so many downloadable videos now available that can be played anywhere, DVD vs Blu-ray maybe more of a minor skirmish than a war. 

DVDs versus downloadable video does not fall neatly into either increasing returns or red queens.  Though both are used to view video, these are different technologies doing different things.  Download technology, whether you are downloading a book, movie, image, etc., fits better into the disruptive technology category.  It is likely DVDs don’t stand a chance against downloadable video.  Downloadable video can go anywhere and play on a variety of viewing technologies.  Currently there are more titles available on DVD, but that is changing rapidly.  This is evident in the demise of Blockbuster at the sword of Netflix.  Netflix got rid of the hassle of having to drive to the video store.  Without the expense of staffing and maintaining retail stores, Netflix was able to easily morph into downloadable sales (Fou, 2011).  Download technology may bring the extinction of DVDs, but it is also making casualties of, among other things, books and buying software on DVD.  It is a technology that has been and will continue to be a game changer.

Video-on-demand is making DVDs obsolete. It enhances the portability, and ease of viewing videos.  It reduces materials necessary to view and does away with going to a store both which reduce price.  Video-on-demand is a retrieval of stereoscopes and episcopes.  These were handheld viewers people could take anywhere to view images.  Episcopes projected 2-D images on a screen or wall.  Stereoscopes were used to view 3-D images. It is unclear what will be the reversal of video-on-demand.

An Episcope

 ©1999-'de Luikerwaal' 

The Stereoscope

 

References

Owen, D. (2008). The betamx vs VHS format war. Retrieved from: http://www.mediacollege.com/video/format/compare/betamax-vhs.html

Fou, A. (2011). Netflix vs Blockbuster – Perfect example of an industry replaced by a more efficient version of itself. Retrieved from: http://go-digital.net/blog/2011/02/netflix-vs-blockbuster-perfect-example-of-an-industry-replaced-by-a-more-efficient-version-of-itself/

Scofield, J. (2003). Why VHS was better than betamax. The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2003/jan/25/comment.comment