10 ms·

Visited last weekend. Interesting for sure. Funny to see how many times and for how long we've been trying to do VR! Some of the "failures" were unfair IMO, li

Visited last weekend. Interesting for sure. Funny to see how many times and for how long we've been trying to do VR! Some of the "failures" were unfair IMO, like minitel and Block Buster: It's like saying using wind sails on ships was a failure because it was replaced by steam engines.

ljw1001 4y ago
Someday I want to own a company that fails like blockbuster
ghaff 4y ago
In the case of Blockbuster, it's reasonable to argue that they should have at least taken advantage of their brand (and relationships) to get into the DVD rental by mail business which would have, relatively speaking, not been a big stretch. Though phasing out retail would have been disruptive. Of course, streaming was a whole different game. (As would be original content.) And it's not like Netflix is looking especially robust at the moment.
- BizarroLand 4y ago
  Blockbuster had a chance to buy Netflix in the early 2000's for $50,000,000. I bet it spent a while regretting not making that purchase, but then again, if they had Netflix may have become a passing fad and never branched out into the online streaming market. https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/netflix-blockbuster-meeting-marc-randolph-reed-hastings-john-antioco.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/netflix-blockbuster-meeting...
  - ghaff 4y ago
    I had forgotten that. Yes. I suspect they’d have done the DVD by mail thing but then would have stagnated however many years later.
    - thunky 4y ago
      It blows my mind that Netflix is still mailing DVDs. Not only that, but their DVD plan is far better then their streaming plan because it includes decent (not Netflix produced) movies.
  - sublinear 4y ago
    I think it's highly unlikely Blockbuster was ever going to build and maintain a streaming service if they had purchased Netflix.
    - BizarroLand 4y ago
      Hopefully this doesn't sound rude but that's what I just said
  - tvb 4y ago
    > Blockbuster had a chance to buy Netflix in the early 2000's for $50,000,000. Ah, an example of the Butterfly Effect: then we'd have a billion references to FAABG on the web instead of FAANG.
- msrenee 4y ago
  I swear Blockbuster tried to do a DVD by mail thing. It just never got popular.
  - ridgered4 4y ago
    Yeah, they definitely did something like this. I recall you could return the DVDs to their stores to speed up the turnaround. And they eventually started a short price war with Netflix. But IIRC they had a lot of debt to begin with and combined with much higher overheard from all the stores it ended predictably.
  - marcosdumay 4y ago
    Would you trust them to get DVDs by mail? At least my model of them was that they would do anything to scam me out of late fees.
  - esotericimpl 4y ago
  - chiph 4y ago
    They did, in summer 2007. They priced it for a dollar less than Netflix. They stuck with it almost 6 years, ending it when they left the retail business (except for the one franchise store remaining in Bend, Oregon). https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-blockbuster-dc/blockbuster-takes-on-netflix-with-mail-only-plans-idUKN1226602120070612 https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-blockbuster-dc/bloc...
    - yakak 4y ago
      I think Blockbuster was an anti-brand at that point because of choices they made to navigate having national brick and mortar shops, making an unknown startup more trust worthy. I'd used them begrudgingly in places that had no independent shops and the various inventory they didn't have were usually rumored to be that their management was christian conservatives, though I think it was more that they avoided a few arbitrary hotspots of potential conservative boycotts that would hurt them in other regions. I remember that when a friend suggested them, I was quite pleased to be paying $1 more not to help them.
- throwoutway 4y ago
  This is how I explain innovator’s dilemma to others
manholio 4y ago
VR is just the most recent incarnation of the "3D vision" gimmick every generation will rediscovered and then abandon. We had multiple waves of this fad, starting with the stereoscopic novelty postcards of the 19th century, the many 3D cinema revivals (the Avatar craze even saw the rise of ludicrous 3D TVs), and now Metaverse and its ilk. It always fails because, once the novelty of the effect wears off, people realize it's basically pointless. The extra information 3D brings is not worth the logistic cost. So they revert to regular 2D cinema, classic virtual worlds like MMORPGs etc. which are much more comfortable to experience and deliver the same basic product.
- creeble 4y ago
  I think this is a pretty good summary, but misses one key point: people don’t like wearing something that blocks their natural vision for very long. Some can’t even do it for a few minutes. It’s not like any other form of technology in that way. Even 3D TVs didn’t have this “feature”. Gamers might be able to do it all day, and it will probably always have that market. But as a replacement for the flip-open or pull-out-of-your-pocket screen, never gonna happen. Sorry Zuck.
- wongarsu 4y ago
  Alternatively, we try again and again because there's a lot of promise if we get it right, but so far the technology just isn't there for anything sustainable beyond the novelty factor. This round we got far enough that there are some industry use cases for AR, which shares 99% of its tech with VR. Maybe that will funnel enough money into development to break out of the hype cycle into something sustainable.
  - manholio 4y ago
    I think stereoscopic viewing is fundamentally a bad idea that holds little promise - it's not really 3D, but a parlor trick that gives confusing depth information, the eye must focus at the screen even if the scene is very close or very far. It's too annoying and tiring as a sustainable consumer technology; maybe tools only professionals are required to use, ex. remote surgery gear, with pros and cons well understood. This could change if holographic digital screens become practical, allowing, for example, multiple people in a room to see a real 3D scene, each from a different angle without any head gear.
beezlewax 4y ago
Pretty sure wind sails are going to be making a comeback soon.
- mcculley 4y ago
  I have been seeing this prediction for a while. What makes you so confident?
  - beezlewax 4y ago
    I've noticed it's become an area of research again in universities. I'm sure tariffs will be put in place eventually to make shipping "greener". Harvesting wind energy seems ideal to at least reduce emissions.
    - mcculley 4y ago
      I work in the shipping industry operating tugboats. I have also seen the claims that this will happen. I remain unconvinced. I haven’t seen any infrastructure changes that would indicate adoption anytime soon.
- wongarsu 4y ago
  Traditional sails are very labor intensive, I doubt they will ever make economic sense again. They also take a lot of space that most ships don't have. The two variations that might go somewhere are kites to save maybe 10% of fuel [1], or some variation of rotor sails [2] on tankers or bulk carriers that have the unobstructed deck space. 1: https://future.hamburg/index.php/en/artikel/skysails-marine-ships-kite-propulsion https://future.hamburg/index.php/en/artikel/skysails-marine-... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship
  - speed_spread 4y ago
    It might happen when rich countries start imposing tariffs on cargo ships using bunker fuel. Burning that stuff is utterly terrible but it's cheap so hey.

ljw1001 4y ago

Someday I want to own a company that fails like blockbuster

ghaff 4y ago

In the case of Blockbuster, it's reasonable to argue that they should have at least taken advantage of their brand (and relationships) to get into the DVD rental by mail business which would have, relatively speaking, not been a big stretch. Though phasing out retail would have been disruptive. Of course, streaming was a whole different game. (As would be original content.) And it's not like Netflix is looking especially robust at the moment.

BizarroLand 4y ago
Blockbuster had a chance to buy Netflix in the early 2000's for $50,000,000. I bet it spent a while regretting not making that purchase, but then again, if they had Netflix may have become a passing fad and never branched out into the online streaming market. https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/netflix-blockbuster-meeting-marc-randolph-reed-hastings-john-antioco.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/netflix-blockbuster-meeting...
- ghaff 4y ago
  I had forgotten that. Yes. I suspect they’d have done the DVD by mail thing but then would have stagnated however many years later.
  - thunky 4y ago
    It blows my mind that Netflix is still mailing DVDs. Not only that, but their DVD plan is far better then their streaming plan because it includes decent (not Netflix produced) movies.
- sublinear 4y ago
  I think it's highly unlikely Blockbuster was ever going to build and maintain a streaming service if they had purchased Netflix.
  - BizarroLand 4y ago
    Hopefully this doesn't sound rude but that's what I just said
- tvb 4y ago
  > Blockbuster had a chance to buy Netflix in the early 2000's for $50,000,000. Ah, an example of the Butterfly Effect: then we'd have a billion references to FAABG on the web instead of FAANG.
msrenee 4y ago
I swear Blockbuster tried to do a DVD by mail thing. It just never got popular.
- ridgered4 4y ago
  Yeah, they definitely did something like this. I recall you could return the DVDs to their stores to speed up the turnaround. And they eventually started a short price war with Netflix. But IIRC they had a lot of debt to begin with and combined with much higher overheard from all the stores it ended predictably.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  Would you trust them to get DVDs by mail? At least my model of them was that they would do anything to scam me out of late fees.
- esotericimpl 4y ago
- chiph 4y ago
  They did, in summer 2007. They priced it for a dollar less than Netflix. They stuck with it almost 6 years, ending it when they left the retail business (except for the one franchise store remaining in Bend, Oregon). https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-blockbuster-dc/blockbuster-takes-on-netflix-with-mail-only-plans-idUKN1226602120070612 https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-blockbuster-dc/bloc...
  - yakak 4y ago
    I think Blockbuster was an anti-brand at that point because of choices they made to navigate having national brick and mortar shops, making an unknown startup more trust worthy. I'd used them begrudgingly in places that had no independent shops and the various inventory they didn't have were usually rumored to be that their management was christian conservatives, though I think it was more that they avoided a few arbitrary hotspots of potential conservative boycotts that would hurt them in other regions. I remember that when a friend suggested them, I was quite pleased to be paying $1 more not to help them.
throwoutway 4y ago
This is how I explain innovator’s dilemma to others

manholio 4y ago

VR is just the most recent incarnation of the "3D vision" gimmick every generation will rediscovered and then abandon. We had multiple waves of this fad, starting with the stereoscopic novelty postcards of the 19th century, the many 3D cinema revivals (the Avatar craze even saw the rise of ludicrous 3D TVs), and now Metaverse and its ilk. It always fails because, once the novelty of the effect wears off, people realize it's basically pointless. The extra information 3D brings is not worth the logistic cost. So they revert to regular 2D cinema, classic virtual worlds like MMORPGs etc. which are much more comfortable to experience and deliver the same basic product.

creeble 4y ago
I think this is a pretty good summary, but misses one key point: people don’t like wearing something that blocks their natural vision for very long. Some can’t even do it for a few minutes. It’s not like any other form of technology in that way. Even 3D TVs didn’t have this “feature”. Gamers might be able to do it all day, and it will probably always have that market. But as a replacement for the flip-open or pull-out-of-your-pocket screen, never gonna happen. Sorry Zuck.
wongarsu 4y ago
Alternatively, we try again and again because there's a lot of promise if we get it right, but so far the technology just isn't there for anything sustainable beyond the novelty factor. This round we got far enough that there are some industry use cases for AR, which shares 99% of its tech with VR. Maybe that will funnel enough money into development to break out of the hype cycle into something sustainable.
- manholio 4y ago
  I think stereoscopic viewing is fundamentally a bad idea that holds little promise - it's not really 3D, but a parlor trick that gives confusing depth information, the eye must focus at the screen even if the scene is very close or very far. It's too annoying and tiring as a sustainable consumer technology; maybe tools only professionals are required to use, ex. remote surgery gear, with pros and cons well understood. This could change if holographic digital screens become practical, allowing, for example, multiple people in a room to see a real 3D scene, each from a different angle without any head gear.

beezlewax 4y ago

Pretty sure wind sails are going to be making a comeback soon.

mcculley 4y ago
I have been seeing this prediction for a while. What makes you so confident?
- beezlewax 4y ago
  I've noticed it's become an area of research again in universities. I'm sure tariffs will be put in place eventually to make shipping "greener". Harvesting wind energy seems ideal to at least reduce emissions.
  - mcculley 4y ago
    I work in the shipping industry operating tugboats. I have also seen the claims that this will happen. I remain unconvinced. I haven’t seen any infrastructure changes that would indicate adoption anytime soon.
wongarsu 4y ago
Traditional sails are very labor intensive, I doubt they will ever make economic sense again. They also take a lot of space that most ships don't have. The two variations that might go somewhere are kites to save maybe 10% of fuel [1], or some variation of rotor sails [2] on tankers or bulk carriers that have the unobstructed deck space. 1: https://future.hamburg/index.php/en/artikel/skysails-marine-ships-kite-propulsion https://future.hamburg/index.php/en/artikel/skysails-marine-... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship
- speed_spread 4y ago
  It might happen when rich countries start imposing tariffs on cargo ships using bunker fuel. Burning that stuff is utterly terrible but it's cheap so hey.