Talk:VHS/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Merge proposal

I proposed a merge from VHS single into this article because: a) that source page itself is too trivial on its own, b) it is too short, c) it may not help its own notability and may likely end up more relevant to VHS. I would like you to vote your instinctive opinion and explain your valid reason as possible. I promise that I will not edit your posts, but I will reply them with my comments instead if possible. Thank you! --Gh87 (talk) 21:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The one reason why I'd say no right now (not thinking about it in detail right now) is that CD single also exists on its own. The VHS single is not a type of VHS tape (such as S-VHS, mini VHS, etc.,) but rather it is a marketing delivery method. VHS singles were popular in the 1980s and 1990s when many musical singers and groups distributed their music videos this way (obviously before DVDs, YouTube, etc.) VHS tapes were used in many other ways, but I wouldn't merge them with this article either. Groink (talk) 00:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah but CDS are still a viable format with lots of CD singles being sold every year. VHS is on its deathbed (even the owner JVC has stopped mnaufacturing VHS standalone units) with VHS singles no longer sold at all. As time progresses, it makes sense to trim-away old stuff and merge it. Take Records as an example: We don't see "record singles" (45s) listed a separate article; it was long ago merged into the main article. ---- Theaveng (talk) 14:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

It's Official: JVC is the last to discontinue stand-alone VHS VCR production!

I ran into Google News, and it turns out that JVC stops stand-alone productions this year, and that they will be sold while supplies last. I need help in some re-editing for current events, now that VHS is still produced in combinations with DVD. Here's the source from Google News Search [1]. --Gh87 (talk) 00:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Table needs to include T-160

The T-160 tape was, in my opinion, the default cassette for US consumers as of the late 1990s. There is no entry for it in the table. (The T-180 has an entry in the table, but I never remember seeing that in the consumer market; perhaps it was only made available to the commercial market). The E-240 seems to have a similar capacity for the PAL market. The T-160 holds 2:40 at SP, 5:20 at LP, and 8:00 at EP/SLP. It might be worthwhile to add a comment that the T-160 was around starting about 1982, but the tape stock was much more susceptible to breakage. It appears that improvements to the tape stock over time made the T-160 more acceptable. (All this comes from my own personal experience). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.77.41.91 (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Recommend sentence revision

In the "Decline of VHS" section, a sentence begins "Virtually only VHS/DVD combination units are available at retail stores in North America". I believe what's attempted to be conveyed (along with some embellishment) is that "Virtually the only VHS recorders available to consumers at retail stores are as part of VHS/DVD combination units, where the DVD component may be a recorder or just a playback unit".

Note that the previous paragraph regarding the T-160 was also entered by me. I forgot to login beforehand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RickLangston (talk • contribs) 21:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Aah good ol' VHS

I remember just the last decade i would start my VCR renting movies daily watching these films i thought how can anything advance beyond that in quality, then DVD of course came along and now i realize the more grainy picture of VHS which i completely didn't notice before DVD came out, totally obvlivious. What technology advancement does to the mind.

I remember the days when you bought a VHS only if you really liked the film enough to warrant repeated viewings, nowadays with DVD folks just buy it for things like extras? And commentaries? And just to keep it part of a nice film collection? With VHS it was just the pure movie itself. I watch dvds occasionnally, but i still watch my old VHS tapes from the time to time which i don't have DVDs for and i still love it.

With respect to your last paragraph, this is very much your own POV and bears no relation to the reasons why me or my friends buy DVDs...It's also worth bearing in mind that VHS movies were, until the late 80's HUGELY expensive on first release, so as to keep the rental market insulated from the sales market. Movies only came down in price after the rental value had dipped and then the product was available as "sell-through". Warner Home Video, for example, didn't even DO sell-through originally, and all tapes were for rental only.

The movie sales market is COMPLETELY different now to its heyday in the 80s, with films coming out a mere 4-6 months after cinema rotation, and straight in at an affordable price of about £10-15 UKP. DVDs are bought much more casually these days, and the extras are much-welcome bonuses if you are a fan of the film.Hardylane (talk) 02:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding a pop reference in "VHS in popular culture"

There are so many examples of VHS tape use in popular culture.

One example should be Case 5 of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (DS version), Case 4 of Phoenix Wright: Justice For All (GBA/DS), and Case 3 of Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney. In DS-only episodes, you use the touch screen to play, fast forward, rewind, pause, etc., whereas the other non-DS episode refers all VHS use. Also, the use of VHS advances through the game once you play them.

Any other examples? --Gh87 (talk) 05:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Popular usage of VHS in Asian markets

I always knew that Asian stores always sold Asian TV series and movies on VHS for rentals before the decline of VHS (there are some stores still selling rentals), especially during the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s.

Hong Kong TV stations such as TVB and ATV, distributed their TV movies and series to worldwide markets, especially for Chinese households; there were few serials--each with hundreds or thousands of episodes stored in VHS tapes, such as A Kindred Spirit, Virtues of Harmony I & Virtues of Harmony II. There were popular Asian series, but I only give out Chinese examples.

There are some, if not many, series not yet released on DVD, such as the examples I presented earlier, especially A Kindred Spirit. Not even YesAsia.com sells these series with hundreds or thousands of episodes. --Gh87 (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Vertical Helical Scan again

While it is clear that "Video Home System" was the original expansion of the acronym, "Vertical Helical Scan", wrong or not, is very widely attested, appearing in patents, technical documentation, and the user manual of a number of VCRs. It seems reasonable to me that this should at least be mentioned in the article. tgies (talk) 02:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I added a footnote about it. I actually intend to write to JVC as well as its North American arm to inquire about whether or not they ever used "Vertical Helical Scan" internally, to satisfy my own curiosity. Perhaps I will do a writeup on what I find off-Wiki. tgies (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe it also became to stand for "video half-inch system" pointing to the width of the tape. Any support here would be well received! WaynePacelle (talk) 07:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It could have also stood for "Vision Has Sound", or any number of incorrect, apocryphal and downright odd things. All of them are wrong. You cannot "vertically scan" on these decks, and half-inch tape was in use long before VHS. If you give a group of people an acronym without its meaning, I'm sure they can come up with any number of plausable possibilities. That is what I think has happened here. People just put their own spin on the acronym and it stuck. However, a mistake is a mistake and should not be related in a factually-based article. "Video Home System" is the original, verified, correct meaning and must remain so. Everything else is just ephemera. Hardylane (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

After quite a bit of web research I found "Video Home System" to be the most widely used definition. I will retract my last statement and support the "Video Home System" definition. Thank you.WaynePacelle (talk) 22:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

A Question

If you record on a used cassette, does the original recording continue to exist under the old one, or is it simply erased? 64.180.93.200 (talk) 14:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I once read an FBI document about this, when I researched about the M-loading mechanism (the image for the M-loader on the main article came from the FBI.) According to the report, overwritten video can be recovered through forensics. Unfortunately the document was removed from the gov web site, so I can't site the resource. But, it does make sense since U.S. DoD procedures require all video tapes to be magnetically erased before they're physically destroyed, versus re-recording with something like a black screen or something. Groink (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

When a video tape is recorded, the tape passes before an erase head, which, unless the head is in some way weak or faulty, completely erases the tape prior to being written by the helically scanning rotating heads.

I would imgagine that it would be difficult to recover material erased using an erase head. I would suggest that it is impossible to recover anything that has subsequently been re-recorded with picture information.

Quite often, law enforcement agencies boast about their technical abilities as a form of threat or warning, without a shred of proof to back it up. Hardylane (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Matshushita becomes the dominant VHS hardware manufacturer in 1977

Matshushita Electronics (Panasonic) became the dominant manufacturer of VHS machines in 1977. Most major television manufactures ( Panasonic, Magnavox, RCA, Philco, Sylvania, Curtis Mathis, Quasar,etc.) contracted Matshushita to build VHS machines with their brand name on the machines. JVC built machines for Zenith and JVC. At this point in time, Matshushita became the largest maker of VHS product, mainly because of a billion dollar investment in manufacturing capacity. Because of that investment, Matshushita was able to capture most of the VHS market. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.171.240 (talk) 21:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, the result is correct, but exactly how it lead to Matsushita being number-one is not correct. Victor was working on the VHS specification at the same time Sony was working on Betamax. Betamax was released into the Japan market first. Because of that, the Japan Ministry of Trade was entertained by Sony for the Betamax to become Japan's standard. The reason was that the government did not want a zillion different video storage formats, causing consumer confusion (think of this like the more modern Zip/Jaz/magneto-optical/CDR/etc. fiasco.) Victor's idea was to flood the market with the VHS format despite the government's wishes, and maybe have the government drop this one-format idea. Victor went door-to-door to many of the manufacturers, trying to sell the VHS standard. Matsushita was the first of these companies to accept Victor's VHS technology. It wasn't the other companies that invited Matsushita (think about it - Victor owned the patent. Why would a company like Magnavox or Phillips be sub-licensing some other company's patent to Matsushita?) In short, Victor and its partners flooded Akihabara with VHS units before the end of the year. By then, VHS units were selling better than Betamax, and therefore the government had absolutely no choice but to drop the one-format-standard idea. Eventually, Matsushita did indeed become the number-one licensee of the VHS standard. I don't have any sources to back this up, as this is one of the pre-Internet stories that I read about in Japanese tech magazines dating back to the early 1980s, and I've memorized those stories. Groink (talk) 03:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

VHS anti-piracy measures?

In the 1990s, I worked with a school librarian who sometimes copied from one VHS tape to another under the fair-use doctrine. Sometimes, the resulting copy had a picture was darker at the top than at the bottom and had unusual color distortion. He said that this was the result of using a VCR that was susceptible to the anti-piracy-encoded signal on some newer source tapes. The VCR he used did indeed make fine copies of some tapes and ugly copies of some others, while my own VCR made fine copies of all. Beyond that, I know nothing of the supposed anti-piracy technology in VHS; but, if there really was such a thing, it should be mentioned in this article. President Lethe (talk) 02:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The technology you are referring to is macrovision. The reason it isn't covered in VHS is that it is not a VHS concept. You can apply macrovision to anything - broadcast and cable TV signals, DVDs, digital tapes, etc. Groink (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

You're probably looking for information on the Macrovision analog copy-protection signal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macrovision#Analog_copy_protection). ::Travis Evans (talk) 04:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Nonesense about VHS no longer being manufactured

Much nonesense in the article concerning "the last of VHS". You can still get newly made VHS tapes from giants such as Sony, JVC, Maxell, TDK, Panasonic, Fuji and others. See http://www.google.com/products?q=vhs+blank&hl=en. 68.224.206.168 (talk) 17:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Low current demand and high earlier output means that it is far from implausible that we are still using up tapes that were produced some time ago. A few months ago Kodak announced that they were ceasing production of their camera film, but that it would remain available for some time due to the stocks they had already produced. Same case here. Stannered (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

If the bit you were referring to was the section surrounding "In December 2008, the final truckload in the USA of home-video VHS tapes rolled out of a warehouse owned by Ryan Kugler", then that is home video - i.e. pre-recorded VHS tapes, not blanks. Stannered (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

In my country, "home video" means a homemade video recording, of the sort shown on America's Funniest Home Videos. So I would have read "home-video VHS tapes" as referring to blanks, not pre-recorded cassettes!—Dah31 (talk) 03:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes blanks will be around for a long time, even if made by secondary manufacturers. I just bought a bunch of 11-hour tapes from SKC, a little-known company but a good quality tape (it can handle super vhs). ---- Theaveng (talk) 13:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

copy-protected TV shows not allowed to be recorded on DVD

Excerpt from Talk:DVD recorder#copy-protected TV shows not allowed to be recorded on DVD

I tried to record one game show on the LG DVD+VHS combo recorder, but it became impossible due to copyright issues. Is it possible that VHS tapes are the only reliabilities to do so, especially when trying to use VCR-2-PC player? --Gh87 (talk) 07:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

--Gh87 (talk) 07:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Dubbing VHS onto DVD on a combo players does not lock out the macrovision (see above section) that protects the VHS tape. The opposite is also true - you cannot dub the DVD onto the VHS tape on the combo players if the DVD is protected by macrovision. The only way to get around this would be to obtain a device that masks out the macrovision signal, and then connect the VHS and DVD in/outs together externally with the anti-macrovision device in-between. Groink (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I beg to differ, but I tried to record the 1977 documentary that is currently unavailable on DVD; unfortunately, it turned out that not ALL VHS tapes can be dubbed into DVD. In fact, even older tapes can be strongly copy-protected according to recording combos. Also, I tried to record the game show with DVD from TV broadcast, but it is also copy-protected. --Gh87 (talk) 09:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be a language issue here (assuming this based on your use of words such as "safe" and such.) What I said earlier, and what you said afterward are actually identical. You really should read the earlier section I pointed out regarding macrovision. Again, if the VHS tape is protected, you cannot dub using just a combo VCR/DVD unit alone. You need to correct the video signal to de-protect the video before it reaches the DVD recorder. And, the only way to do this would be to send the VCR video signal OUT, have it pass through something like a TBC, AGC stabilizer, macrovision filter, or some other device, and then re-enter the combo unit and into the IN connection on the DVD recorder side. Also, you mentioned that a TV signal could not be recorded on the DVD recorder; this is also covered in the macrovision article, where a TV broadcaster can protect the video signal from being recorded. I've experienced this with Time-Warner when I tried to record one of their pay-on-demand broadcasts. Hope this clears things up. Groink (talk) 03:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Very confused at what you are trying to say.... Macrovision was not imposed upon the public until 1984, so can not exist on an earlier pre-recorded tape. If the tape is older than 1984, the combo's circuitry might be interpreting signal dropout, VGC instability or bad timing pulses on the tape as being copy-protection. Hardylane (talk) 11:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'll rephrase my previous post. It was the 1988 copyrighted VHS tape of a 1977 produced documentary; otherwise, I should say "1988 tape". What you said makes this tape safer than using pre-1984 tape (imagine Orwell's 1984 universe), especially when trying to dub into DVD.

I dunno about "safer"...but if it's a commercial tape, sold after 1985, then most combo machines won't dub it. You'll need a second machine, and an AGC stabiliser, to do it. Macrovision doth suck. Hardylane (talk) 02:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I tried to record programs from DIRECTV receiver. Earlier times, they successfully were recorded and edited and finalized without problems. However at later times, there were lousy digital shots; either the Macrovision must have successfully ruined my unfinalized disc into "unknown, unreadable disc" or the burner sucks donkey testicles. I think my combo player realized what's going on; I nearly succeeded in dubbing a game show until copyright issue warning. I wonder if the same thing could happen to LaserDisc players connecting to DVD recorders or combo recorders, with either copyrighted issues or badly made burner. --Gh87 (talk) 06:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Get yourself a macrovision filter and plug it into any dubbing chain you ever use. Since that is not possible when dubbing within a combo unit, use two separate machines instead. Anorak2 (talk) 08:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It really sounds like you have a faulty DVD recorder. All DVD recorders are required by law to detect copyright protected material. If a video signal is protected, the DVD recorder should have detected it within seconds. FYI, copyright protection does not ruin the formatting of the writable DVD. As Anorak2 pointed out, it would be best to purchase a stand-alone DVD recorder, along with a macrovision filter. I'd seriously look into the Sony DVDirect DVD recorder line; this recorder supposedly has built-in TBC, and is designed to convert VHS and other analog or digital sources. Groink (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Tape Lengths

"In order to avoid confusion, manufacturers indicate the playing time in minutes that can be expected for the market the tape is sold in. ... SP is Standard Play and LP is Long Play at 1/2 speed for both NTSC and PAL regions. EP/SLP designates Extended Play/Super Long Play at 1/3rd speed for NTSC regions. (PAL does not have an EP speed.)"

Er, that last sentence is wrong, as I live in the UK, and have a PAL machine under my TV that has an EP (as well as SP & LP) function. The Yeti (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you have the model number and (approximate) manufacturing date for that unit (the exception that proves the rule?)? All the VHS decks I remember supported, at most, SP and LP for PAL and SP, LP (sometimes only for playback), and SLP/EP for NTSC. I would venture that EP is/was uncommon in PALland, to the point that you couldn't expect anyone you were lending tapes to to be able to play them.

Oh, and I don't remember T–180 in NTSCland: surely T–160 was much more widespread, indeed, positively ubiquitous? (An Amazon US search in Electronics/Accessories & Supplies/Blank Media turns up three items for "T–180" (all Maxell) and twenty items for "T–160" (from many manufacturers; most marketed as "8 hours").)—Dah31 (talk) 03:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The story is this:

• In NTSC-land, SP and EP are the most widespread speeds. The middle speed LP was popular for a while but it was not approved by JVC and is considered "non-standard". Therefore more recent machines only support it for playback, but they refuse to record in it in order to avoid producing even more "non-standard" tapes.

• In PAL-Land, SP and LP are most widespread. EP is a recent addition which only a couple of the last generation VHS machines support. I don't know if it's blessed by JVC, but in any case it's not widespread. At the time the above paragraph was written, PAL EP didn't exist yet. That's how young it is. :) Anorak2 (talk) 10:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

VHS Single.

With this article being a stub, I feel It should be merged into VHS. That way we can improve the VHS article and do away with another stub!--The Angriest Gamer you've Ever Heard 22:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge completed. groink 00:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Akai, Sony?

The phrase listed "The Video Home System,[1] better known by its abbreviation VHS, is[2] a recording and playing standard developed by Roberts (Akai) and was purchased by Sony and later sold to JVC Victor Company of Japan, Limited (JVC) and launched in Europe and Asia in September 1976, and the United States in June 1977"

I see no reference to the claim VHS was created by Akai, in fact I feel it is incorrect. Together with the claim that Sony sold the technology to Victor. Unless this claim can be referenced - I think it should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.211.53 (talk) 03:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Unclear Sentence

"On the other hand, Betamax offers a superior picture quality to VHS, something with hindsight is a somewhat subjective matter to many."

I'm having trouble making sense of this sentence. Perhaps "something that, with hindsight, . . ." would clarify it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.7.36.145 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 22 October 2004 (UTC)

VHS is not yet obsolete!

I read the article and found this to be inaccurate! Stores are still selling VHS blank tapes almost everywhere, and DVDs has copyright issues for recording broadcasted programs, especially rewritables and recordables. I think this article needs to be more accurate before conclusions from people will happen; I still buy tapes and will continue to do so until copyright issues are 100% completely successful. --Gh87 (talk) 06:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's the numero-uno issue here: The problem with this article is that most of the contributors approach VHS using POV. I'm not saying POV in that no one here cites their edits (although this article is lacking references, big time,) even if they cite references, with something as old as VHS, people who still use it are not the same people who blog about or write articles about it. So, in a strange way, there is a bias amongst the Internet since many contributors to Internet content are also those who use the latest-n-greatest gadgets. For old things like VHS, we've got to remember this, and avoid using weasel words that assume conclusions just because they can't find any resources that counter the idea otherwise. I think what the Internet needs are more writings by people who use the older technologies. groink 07:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for editing out the "weasel" word, and I am grateful for that. I think we have to tag this article with issues in {{article issues}}, such as whatever you are concerned with. --Gh87 (talk) 07:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe that blank VHS tapes will be sold for some years to come, but to say they are "lower cost" is not accurate. I can buy blank DVD's for my recorder for a small fraction of the price of VHS (unless, perhaps, a store is liquidating blank tape stock very cheaply). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.105.199.191 (talk) 05:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

VHS tapes will always be available on ebay - 100,000+ results in VHS category. something is blocking the link but see dvd.shop.ebay.com/items/VHS_?_catref=1&_sacat=309 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.14.176 (talk) 05:36, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem here are two things. One, it is original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. YOU went out and did the data gathering, and then made up the conclusion on your own. That is not allowed on Wikipedia. Second, eBay is NOT a credible source for trends. As I said in my edit comments, you can find ANYTHING on eBay. Retail stores and such have more credibility than a garage sale like eBay. You using eBay as a source is a bad choice. Groink (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Ebay is reliable - it had $8.7 billion revenue last year. Also anyone can check the figures. At the moment it is 1,310,482 results for movies, 118,254 results for VHS. This means 9% of all movies listed for sale on ebay are VHS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.14.176 (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

"Obsolete" is not a well defined word. It could mean any of:

• 1. It has become a niche market.
• 2. You cannot buy new machines in high street shops any more.
• 3. You cannot buy new machines at all, not even online.
• 4. You cannot buy blank media any more.
• 5. The second hand market for machines and/or blanks is also dead.

For VHS the answers for these are cuurently: 1. yes, 2. almost yes, 3. not quite yet but we're getting there, 4. no, 5. no. That's almost the same state of affairs as audio cassettes and vinyl. Would you call those "obsolete"? Anorak2 (talk) 08:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Editors cannot base statements in the article upon the results of an e-basy search. That is clearly original research and not allowed.-- The Red Pen of Doom 11:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, boys & girls. First off, the word "obsolete" does not even exist in this article. The article basically says that VHS is in decline. The article includes several sources that can verify this as fact. Why some editors are reading into the idea that the article says VHS is obsolete is beyond me. The article also makes it very clear that manufacturers still make DVD/VHS combo units, and that blank media can still be found in retail stores.

As for pre-manufactured content such as movies, I made it clear earlier that the used market is not a good indicator of the status of VHS. However, if I wanted to use the word "obsolete," one could certainly make a good argument that VHS can be obsolete. Webster's dictionary defines obsolete as "No longer in use; gone into disuse; disused; neglected." None of those points need to be 100-percent in order for obsolete to apply. Even Wikipedia defines technical obsolescence as "the state of being which occurs when an object is no longer wanted, even though it may still be in good working order" and "when a new product or technology supersedes the old, and it becomes preferred to utilize the new technology in place of the old." Using eBay as an example, check to see how many of those sales actually turn into money. Most of the time on eBay, one's junk is everyone else's junk. See what I mean about using eBay as a source?

In short, the article accurately states that VHS is on the decline. It doesn't say it is obsolete, although one can actually make a verifiable argument that it is. Groink (talk) 11:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

All I wanted was that the article mention that you can buy VHS movies of almost any movie, on ebay and other places. As it reads now it sounds like it is impossible to buy VHS movies - only blanks - when this is not correct. There are also currently 250,000+ VHS movies for sale on amazon. amazon.com/s/qid=1247751989/ref=sr_hi?ie=UTF8&rs=501232&bbn=404272&rh=n%3A404272&page=1

Regarding obsolescence it can't really be obsolete if there are ways it is superior to DVDs, which there are. For instance if you're watching a movie and there is a power failure or you are moving to a different player for some reason, it is easier to get back to the spot you were at. VHS: just press play. DVD: wait for warnings, title screens, animations etc. to load, sort through chapters, find chapter, fast forward/rewind. DVDs also damage easily and often they freeze/chapter skips or doesn’t work at all. More criticism of DVDs vs VHS here: [2] [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.14.176 (talk) 14:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The reason why we do not include store chain names in this article is that Wikipedia is not a catalog or a price guide. Those other sources regarding VHS actually being better than DVD is considered reaching, and it is still much further from the truth that is well referenced in this article. You can still purchase 5.25-inch floppy disks or used games, but still computers like the Apple II and Commodore 64 is obsolete. To say that an analog device is always better than digital - it is like saying that a 1960s grade landline telephone is better than a cell phone because it doesn't operate on batteries. This level of logic is totally flogged, and is reaching in order to satisfy a personal view that you have. Groink (talk) 22:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I want to state one more thing here. The problem with the anon is not the choice of sources. Rather, his problem is how he uses the sources. It is against Wikipedia guidelines to come up with a POV on your own, and then search throughout the Internet for references to satisfy your opinion. This is a form of biased editing. The idea is that you can make anything sound like the truth because there may be one or two people out of millions of others who share the same POV.

Regarding using Amazon and eBay as source, both places sell used goods. The anon is treating the source like a Google search when attempting to prove WP:NOTEWORTHY. Just the total hits alone is what the anon is riding on. However, this is a very bad use of statistics, in that he doesn't justify the meaning behind those numbers. As I stated earlier, Blockbuster flooding eBay with thousands of VHS movies is not good statistics for several reasons. One, what if the no one bids or purchase these videos? The search totals don't demonstrate this idea. Second, what about the thousands of people who can't afford to upgrade to DVD? They're not a demographic of eBay buyers, so it is probable that they won't be going to eBay for VHS movies. What if the potential buyer doesn't have a credit card, or a PayPal account? And, what if these people don't even posses a computer, or like using e-commerce? Again, a POV and then proving it using flawed and incomplete statistics goes against everything Wikipedia believes in. And sources like eBay and Amazon are flawed because the numbers can easily be inflated by just one or two sellers, and it is biased towards the types of people who don't have the ability to purchase from these places. Groink (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)