I agree 100%. We have a Samsung 50-inch DLP TV. It's about 5 years old and it works great. Back then, DLP was a much better value than LCD. Of course, when the DLP breaks we will probably replace it with an LCD or something similar.
Interesting discussions about the definition of "turkey." I agree that some of these were not turkeys per se when them came out. And how much of this is hindsight?
* Some were out-and-out turkeys :-)
* Some worked but were overtaken by competitors in short order - temporal turkeys? Cloudy crystal ball?
* Some were not technical turkeys, but were financial turkeys (cost too much or charged too much)
* Some were not technical turkeys but were "feature" turkeys (the customer really did not want that functionality)
* Turkeys of another "feather" that I have missed
Absolutely agree here. I tried a couple of demos in the stores the last month. Can't even remember the names...but one was tolerable for 5 minutes, then gave me a headache. Another had glasses/visor that was too heavy, and gave me a headache right away. Viewing stereo photographs does not hurt my head THAT much...
So I rate them as not ready for prime time yet.
All of the technologies mentioned here actually had some promise when they 1st came out. I think the biggest turkey I have ever encountered was Digital Research's MPM. Actually, Gary Kildall's CPM fared much better ... till IBM and Bill Gates came along with DOS no?
"CueCat" - I've been trying to remember that name. It's funny how some of these turkeys come back around a second, third or fourth time and sometimes actually catch on. QR codes have essentially the same purpose as the CueCat codes, but QR codes don't require a custom reader that's tethered to a desktop PC.
The thin client PC or disk-less workstation has shown up and died numerous times. It may actually have a chance in its next incarnation with all of the online applications available now. Maybe. Maybe not.
Sometimes what is one generation's turkey is just before its time.
tomkinsr, your point is well taken. None of the "turkeys" mentioned here were designed and marketed by total morons looking for a fast buck. (Well, at least they weren't morons.) Products rise or fall for reasons sometimes obscure, and sometimes obvious. Obvious in hindsight, that is. There are very few products out there that were released with truly foreseeable and disastrous flaws. A few, but not many. To label some of these products "turkeys" is a disservice to the designers and companies that brought them out.
Bert, the method used in VHS to record hifi stereo was a wavelength-driven recording layer. Audio was laid down in a fairly thick layer (thick due to wavelength) in the tape. Then the video was recorded on top, but didn't penetrate the thickness of the tape. So you had both audio and video, one above the other. Trouble was playback. The heads for audio and video were separate, and as a result, tapes didn't always interchange between machines. You could get good tracking of video, or audio, but not both. Sony's hifi stereo was part of a single rf feed to the heads. Also, the cassettes were more compact and robust than VHS. For years afterwards, professional news gathering was done on the Beta format... not VHS. Beta failed because it cost a few bucks more than VHS, and the public doesn't want technical superiority when viewing copies of Sex in the City. They want cheap.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.