I suppose this is actually two questions, and it may belong in Great Debates rather than General Questions. Anyway, here goes:
What is the difference between VHS and Beta? Why do many people insist that Beta was better than VHS?
Why did VHS win out over Beta in the marketplace?
From a technical point of view, Beta was usually considered a better format.
Why it failed? It’s complex. Some say it was because beta refused to license its technology to others, while VHS did. This has been debated, though.
One main reason is that being technologically superior is only one factor in the success of adopting a new technology. There are quite a few examples of a technology that’s “better” losing out to the inferior due to other factors (e.g., Stanley Steamer vs. gas engine cars; CBS’s spinning disk color TV system vs. RCA’s NTSC). In other words, you may have built a better mousetrap, but if the older version is still good enough, the world won’t care.
Here are a couple of old threads that deal with this subject, I don’t have much to add, though, everything I know about it I learned here. 
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=4890
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=36773
Chaos theory says that once a particular thing has attracted enough stuff to it, that will tip the balance and then everything will flock to it. The example given in the book on chaos theory that I read was VHS versus Beta. At one point VHS had just enough more of the market (for whatever reason) that the whole market quickly flocked to VHS, leaving Beta out in the cold.
This principle was first stated in the Gospel:
To him who has much, much shall be given.
From an engineering point of view Beta was superior. VHS maxed out at about 240 lines while Beta was closer to 280. Thing is, back in the 70s nobody gave a shit about lines of resolution because TVs all had smaller screens (19" being typical) and fuzzy pictures. Today TV’s are typically 27" to 35" and have much clearer pictures, but even so, people are still not clamoring for higher resolution. Look at how long HDTV has languished on the sidelines.
Beta also used a superior ‘U’ loading mechanism as apposed to VHS’ ‘M’ loading system which put more strain on the tape. But again, no one cared because it didn’t put too much strain on it (i.e. it didn’t fail).
But I think the most important reason is recording time. When Sony introduced the Betamax it could only record one hour on a tape. When VHS came out it could record 2 hours on a tape. And VHS quickly introduced 4, then 6 (and eventually with thinner tape 8) hour formats, while at the same time Beta only got to 2.
So basically:
[ul][li]Although Beta was technically a little better, VHS was good enough.[/li][li]Matsushita, the inventors of VHS, licensed it to other companies right from the start while Sony didn’t (kinda like IBM clones vs. Macs).[/li][li]VHS always had a longer recording format.[/li][/ul]
RealityChuck:
There are many words I would use to describe CBS’ spinning color wheel system. Fanciful, unique, clever, as well as impractical, cumbersome, unreliable, Rube Goldberg-esque, and downright dangerous, but superior is not one of them. NTSC was clearly better.
And for that matter, the Stanley Steamer was something of an unreliable deathtrap as well…
Economists like to call this a “market failure.” Well, sort of… more precisely, you’ve got to have a new technology that has benefits that outweigh the costs of switching to it (if anyone likes I can go into more detail, but if you all get bored as easily as I do you’d probably prefer that I not). Once you have this technology, it has to be demonstrated that society has chosen the “inferior” product for reasons outside of proper market forces.
I guess what this is leading up to is that there is quite the debate as to whether or not this sort of market failure actually occurs, and one of the examples trotted around by both sides is that of the betamax vs. VHS wars… larger libraries may have a great little book called “Winners, Losers and Microsoft” by a couple of libertarian economists named Liebowitz and Margolis (I forget their first names off-hand). It presents an (admittedly biased) argument that maintains VHS was ultimately superior because of its longer recording time, that Beta’s picture quality was at best marginally superior, and also does a good job debunking the “Sony didn’t license out its technology” myth.
Even though I disagree with a good deal of what’s in the book, WL&M is a great read to get you thinking before going off about inferior products winning out for the wrong reasons… although I still think it happens despite the authors’ best efforts.
Philips sytem 2000 was even better and died even faster. Sony refused to license Beta and VHS spread faster and became #1.
Sony and Phillips made sure they did not make the same mistake again when they jointly developed the Compact Disk.
OK. All the answers so far seem to hinge on the assumption that the improvement in picture quality didn’t make it worthwhile to invest in different technology that you 1) couldn’t use on your freinds video machines and 2) couldn’t use to tape movies off TV.
That being true, what do y’all think will be the future of DVD, which seems to have the same fundamental advantages/disadvantages?
Some other reasons are that Sony was the company sued over the legality of recording network programming. By the time Sony won in court, VHS, which JVC, I believe, was a major part of, had already become too prevalent. And that was due to the decision of the porn industry to release movies on VHS rather than Beta, believe it or not. Couples and other persons who wanted to watch porn at home rather than in a nasty theater bought VHS-format VCRs and ended Betamax’s chances. One of my buddies still has a Beta machine and a couple of movies.
As for DVD, I expect the MPAA to spend so much money making it impossible for recordable DVDs to become common that it won’t matter anytime soon. Either that, or it will end up like CD-Rs, and we’ll be figuring out how to “get new releases at discount prices,” such as Gnutella or the other file-sharing programs.
(Note: I read Slashdot, and I oppose the DMCA and UCITA. Please don’t flame me, OK?)
How do figure DVD has the same qualities as Beta? Currently DVD is a play-only technology and fits that bill perfectly and offers incredibly HUGE benefits over VHS for pre-recorded movie playback. It is catching on quickly, is openly licensed, and well-supported.
You seem to assuming that DVD is intended to compete with VHS. I don’t think that is true. Right now, I am the only DVD owner I know that doesn’t own a VCR, too (the old one died and I have yet to replace it since I have a TV tuner card and an extra 40GB hard drive to use in the mean time). DVD is a supplement to VHS so that we can watch our favorite movies a million times without picture degradation. For recording at home, the VHS VCR will rule for at least the next five years. TIVO and ReplayTV are closer to being direct competitors to the VCR although both machines need a VCR for any archival storage.
As far as acceptance by the porn industry, DVD has that, too. The only multi-angle discs I’ve heard of yet are porn DVDs.