Museum of Failure

Post by chowells » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 9:30 PM UTC

manholio wrote: post #42

wongarsu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

Post by BizarroLand » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 11:13 PM UTC

sublinear wrote: post #49

BizarroLand wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I think it's highly unlikely Blockbuster was ever going to build and maintain a streaming service if they had purchased Netflix.

Post by chiph » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 12:54 AM UTC

msrenee wrote: post #44

ghaff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 especi…

I swear Blockbuster tried to do a DVD by mail thing. It just never got popular.

Post by tvb » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 2:30 AM UTC

BizarroLand wrote: post #41

ghaff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 especi…

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...

Post by Nomentatus » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 3:54 AM UTC

inanutshellus wrote: post #56

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. An entertaining idea in the abstract, perhaps, but this is just weak sensationalism and poor execution. I don't see anything substantive that explains how something failed. Instead of taking the right attitude of discovering where something ostensibly went wrong, it seems to relish in dismissive ridicule in the style of FailArmy.

I think you nailed it. The hook is "failure is how you succeed" but they show dead end products with perfunctory blurbs and facile presentations. I'd've expected these, yes, but also more substantive "failed 'til I didn't" exhibits such as representations of the hundred+ prototypes that James Dyson purported to have made before finally figuring out the bagless vacuum. Or... photos of Abraham Lincoln and a long, long,…