Steve

I would agree it was wider adoption and eventually greater content that won
the market for VHS, but this was not achieved by licensing their technology
at that time, although they did so extensively later.

When home Video came into the UK in the early 70's (although Philips were
the early leaders) the market for TV was controlled by the rental market
with over 90% of TV's at that time being rented, a captive market for Video.

JVC actually won in the UK (but not elsewhere) because it did a deal with
the major rental companies, principally Thorn UK who owned the majority of
the rental market (through it's DER, Radio Rentals, Focus and Rumbelows
outlets) and the content market (through it's film interests) at that time,
the licensing came later.

Betamax tied up with Granada who did not have the rental base nor the film
interests to outmuscle Thorn.

In terms of the consumer, if you rented from Thorn you got VHS if you rented
from Granada you got Betamax, there was no choice.

What JVC achieved was to get access to the largest client base together with
the largest content base all controlled by one company. As I said clever
marketing, I know I worked for Thorn UK at the time.

Windows was dominant before Linux was thought of, Microsoft saw off the Mac,
and IBM incidentally, through clever marketing having learned the lessons of
among others JVC/Betamax. It was the marketing of Windows that enabled it to
dominate and thereby become a standard, even though the product was inferior
to others.

My point is that I suspect that this is what will happen to the VLE market
given time, and if the standards people are keen on do not fit in with the
winners (which will be American) then they will be bypassed. This is not to
say that standards development should not continue but you should not assume
that the standards being developed will win at the end of the day.

As for the havoc wreaked on FE by 'cost effectiveness' in recent years
(though not of course when it comes to Principals salaries) if you are
unaware of what has been happening, management models from the 80's,
downsizing of staff while increasing class sizes, cutting full time staff in
favour of part-time and agency working, chopping salaries and benefits to
the bone, increasing teaching hours, loading teaching staff with admin work,
cutting holiday entitlement to name but a few then you need to get out more
as do many in HE

As for talking down, I don't accept your explanation, the whole tone of your
message seems to infer that only the select few have it right, as witnessed
by your comment
"I must comment on this one. Only because so many of you seem to have got it
wrong!"
What makes you so sure you have it right?

Incidentally Politicians would be the last body of people I would use to
lend credence to my arguments, they talk down to people all the time.

Danny


----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Molyneux" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Standards Again


> Danny should realise that it was not "clever" marketing that made VHS
> the winner but wider-adoption which led to the creation of more content
> for the inferior system.
>
> JVC won because it licensed its technology to other manufacturers - it
> was this that opened up the market and let's face it the consumer
> dictated which becomes standard and that is based on value for money. IE
> how much content is out there and at what price - Basic principles of
> business-consumer economics. There are other examples:
>         Windows vs. Linux vs. MAC OS to name but one closer to home
>
> I fail to see your point about wreaking havoc on the FE sector - can you
> elaborate.
>
> As for taking down to people - the comment was not address to an
> individual and therefore can be seen as a debating tool. Politicians use
> it all the time. I have no problems with people expressing their lack of
> understanding.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny McAtominey [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 22 February 2002 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Standards Again
>
> What was there to learn from the BETAMAX/VHS saga except that the
> inferior
> product (standard) won in the UK through clever marketing.
> It has always been so and I suspect it will be so in the end with VLE's
> and
> that the standards bodies will end up ratifying what the market decides.
> It does not make commercial sense for any vendor to make it easy for
> their
> product to be replaced by another so until the inevitable shake out in
> suppliers comes we are unlikely to get defacto standards.
>
> On Value for Money you make a serious point, unfortunately this has been
> used as an excuse to wreak havoc on FE for many years so you are
> unlikely to
> get much sympathy from that sector.
>
> As for "I suggest that colleagues add value to the debate on standards
> when
> they fully understand the impact of their comments". Maybe we should
> have
> standards in talking down to people, you've certainly made a start
>
> Danny McAtominey
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Molyneux" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 4:49 PM
> Subject: Standards Again
>
>
> > I must comment on this one. Only because so many of you seem to have
> got
> > it wrong!
> >
> > 1. Microsoft
> >
> > The LRN format for storing material is IMS Content packaging
> compliant.
> >
> > 2. Standards
> >
> > The whole issue about standards is "inter-operability" and has nothing
> > to do with devaluing the delivery of learning or teaching. Of course
> the
> > Student comes first but second on the agenda is VALUE FOR MONEY!
> >
> > If members of this list cannot see the need for reduction of overall
> > costs of materials and the huge benefits of collaboration then many
> are
> > probably in the wrong job.
> >
> > I cannot for the life of me imagine a debate like this taking place if
> > we where talking about a technology that has been around for 100s of
> > years and an excellent teaching medium. THE PRINTED WORD.
> >
> > Have you learned nothing from the BETAMAX/VHS saga.
> >
> > I suggest that colleagues add value to the debate on standards when
> they
> > fully understand the impact of their comments.
> >
> >
> > I get more frustrated trying to defend what should be seen as common
> > sense.
> >
> > My biggest fristration is that people comment on colplienace without
> > understand what complaince means. Just saying SCORM or IMS is not
> > enough. It is like saying I am TV complient but not wherer that isd
> > PAL/NTSC or SECAM.
> >
> > It is for this reason that the standards debate MUST continue until
> > there is consensous across the sector. Which sould include ALL sectors
> > involved not just in education but also in training. At the momnet the
> > standards agenda is being run by technologiest without much input from
> > pratiishioners that are technology savy.
> >
> >
> > As for IMS they are NOT a standards body but are generating
> > recommendations. It is up to standards bodies, industry or govenment
> to
> > make then official. SCORM for example is supported by the US DOD. The
> > onlt exception is when they become "de-fecto standards" as many would
> > say Windows is.
> >
> > OK - now fire away with the hate mail. :-)
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Black [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: 20 February 2002 15:40
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Standards
> >
> > I didn't realise the debate was going to get this lively! I
> > thought I was alone. Is there anyone on the list from
> > Microsoft and if so, could they please let us know why they
> > aren't going down the IMS and Interoperability routes? Is
> > it because the CUSTOMER is 'virtually' always right?
> >
> > Andy Black
> >
> >
> >
> > Member of the Content Council and registered as an e-
> > learning consultant. www.contentcouncil.co.uk
> >
> > Get your own zoom email - click here - http://www.zoom.co.uk/
> >
> > ***************** List information: *****************
> > Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
> > Access the list via the web on
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
> > To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave
> > vle
> >
> > ***************** List information: *****************
> > Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
> > Access the list via the web on
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
> > To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave
> vle
> >
>
> ***************** List information: *****************
> Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
> Access the list via the web on http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
> To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave
> vle
>
> ***************** List information: *****************
> Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
> Access the list via the web on http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
> To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave vle
>

***************** List information: *****************
Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
Access the list via the web on http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave vle