You're right, this is just your opinion. Most (if not all) of your arguments really don't translate into an improvement in the real world over HD DVD.
IMO disc capacity favors HD DVD. By only having two sizes to choose from it forces studios to choose between the savings of single layer or the more expensive DL. HD DVD offers 15gb, 17gb, 30gb, 34gb, 15gb + 4.7gb DVD, and soon will offer 51gb and is working towards 34gb+4.7gb dvd and 17gb+9.4gb dvd. So size favors HD DVD.
Your trying to blame HD DVD for movies (Transformers and Shrek
) not using lossless audio codecs would be like blaming Ferrari because I decided to replace the tires on it with recaps. Toshiba made the lossless codecs avalible, not their fault the studio didn't use them.
1080i argument also favors HD DVD. How many HDTVs don't support 1080p? Why force them to pay for something they can't use? Besides every HDTV can upscale 1080i to 1080p just fine since all OTA, cable, and sat only comes this way. This allows the user to decide if he would like to spend the extra money or not.
The new profiles are the reason I have not bought a BD player yet. It's hardly a simple FW update should fix the PS3 but clearly will not fix all the SA players sold to date. If BD never said they were coming it would be different and I may never use them but I want them. Just like lossless audio, I want it even if I can't use it yet. But stating that uncompressed vs. compressed lossless audio is better is just a waist of breath, it's not.
So your opinions are shared by some but if you take the time to learn what the real differences are you'll understand that they really don't translate into better for the consumer.
|