heavy liquid said:Why were they impractical? Because Laserdisc was bigger than a VHS? DVHS started right when DVD started and never really stood a chance. DVD did everything they did but better.
Laserdisc was a solid step up both in audio and visual. How was it impractical? Because it was a large 12" disc? Most people (including myself) were able to forgive that in lieu of the benifits of the format.
Laserdisc had 2 main problems:
1) Form Factor - I'm not sure if people cared that much about the size, but they definitely didn't like flipping disks halfway through a movie.
2) It was too early - This is relating to it's A/V advantages. In its heyday, most people owned TV's without S-Video. Due to that, they had to rely on the shitty comb filters found in most TV's. Other then a lack of tracking errors and tape deterioration artifacts, the video advantages simply weren't that noticeable with what most people used as displays.
Similarly, most people didn't have stereos hooked up to their TV's, so the audio benefits were lost for the most part.
When you consider the above, and then couple it with the price ... not many people were going to bite. Why pay so much more, when the only obvious advantages are track skipping and no deterioration?
Note: I love Laserdisc (especially in terms of audio). Just stating why I think it failed.