Lies, I tell you!
Tim, you're spouting off the same old tired lies we've been hearing for way too long, and I for one am getting tired of them.
Tim said: 1. HD DVD has no region coding, Blu-Ray does (and with Sony at the helm, they'll use their lawyers to kill anyone offering imports or cracks).
And what, 10 or 15 discs have bothered to use region coding to this point? That's what, 2-3%? And of course, the region coding has already been cracked. And don't forget that both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD support DVD region locking. If HD-DVD had survived, how long do you think it would have been before the studios had convinced Toshiba to modify their spec to include some kind of region locking?
Tim said: 2. HD DVD is a complete spec, Blu-Ray still is not (and all but about one release is still profile 1.0, missing a lot of good features found on most HD DVD discs).
So why did the HD-DVD camp deem it necessary to revise their spec to allow for a 3 layer disc if their spec is "complete"? Is the BR spec not complete because the BR camp is working on a 4 layer 100GB disc? The BR spec IS complete and functional. Just because BR is being enhanced does not make it incomplete. If it were "incomplete", we'd see what we saw with the early wireless N devices -- incompatibilities and patches to make one device work with another. This might have been a useful argument 2 years ago, but give it a rest. The spec is final, published, and engineering is moving forward.
Tim said: 3. HD DVD is not propped up entirely by a games console that isn't fully featured, up to spec or even supports all the HD audio formats! (this is HD after all, you should get 'HD' in all aspects).
BR supports more video formats than HD-DVD, and it supports the most important of the audio formats, specifically UNCOMPRESSED audio. If you've got uncompressed, lossless audio, why would you want more choices in compressed audio? Oh, wait, could it be because HD-DVD needs it because they don't have the bandwidth that BR has?
And the PS3 DOES support v1.1, the latest released spec. I don't know where you get your misinformation from...
Tim said: 4. HD DVD is cheaper to produce, both in terms of discs and players, which is better for the studios, better for manufacturers, increases competition, and is better for the consumer.
Cheaper in the short term. More expensive due to lower capacity and more restrictive bandwidth, resulting in multi-disc shipments when BR will still only need to ship one disc. With 60% more content on a BR disc (today; 233% more with 4 layer BR), studios will be able to save money longterm.
Tim said: 5. HD DVD's interactive content is easier to develop than Blu-Ray's BD-J system. Again, better for everyone. Get releases quicker and cheaper for a start.
The Microsoft proprietary HDi software relies upon software licensed from Microsoft to build content. BR's Java technology has had a slow start due to its steeper learning curve, but as more open source (and proprietary) tools are developed, and as the studios are learning how to work with the tools they've got, that curve will change. It may have been easier a year ago, but which product offers the best future-proof option?
Player pricing is a debatable argument, especially if you're basing it on the bargain basement clearance sale that WalMart had in November, when they clearanced out last year's HD-A2 to make room for its replacement. Desperation sales of obsolete hardware shouldn't be used to form your argument. Low end hardware costs between the 2 lines are within 1/3rd of each other. Do you really think that small a difference is going to matter longterm? I would say that low volumes because of an infantile format war caused by Toshiba's recalcitrance in going with the rest of the world would have more bearing on longterm costs.
Give it up, Tim. HD-DVD is dead. Your specious arguments are demeaning to you.