I've come to the conclusion that for some people, it isn't really about Blu-ray vs HD DVD. It's about hating Sony.
Don't get me wrong, I certainly think Sony has done much to deserve a lot of opprobrium. But perhaps we sometimes blind ourselves to our own acts and motives. When your time is spent twisting every possible story into anti-Sony, or creating doubts wherever possible, etc, perhaps a line has been crossed. Sure, casual readers may be taken in, and long time posters may tire of pointing out inaccuracies faster than the stuff can be pumped out- but regular readers know when to take certain statements with a grain of salt, or an entire salt lick.
One's own reputation is valuable, and for the most part, in one's own hands.
I don't hesitate for a second that I don't like Blu-Ray because Sony is behind it (in one way or another, IMO big time, but even if Sony had a 2% stake in Blu-Ray, I'd still have issues with it).
However, my biggest issue isn't Sony, it isn't the possibility of obsolete players, it isn't video or sound quality is worse than HD-DVD, and most certainly isn't the lack of movies on Blu-Ray. It is simply a matter of cost. When HD-DVD cost $100 or more less to purchase hardware, I feel like I am being taken to the cleaners.
I mean, here is two competing formats, why would I go with the most expensive when the cheaper one is as good (or even close as good!) as the other format? Because Sony (or Panasonic, Disney, etc.) is behind it? Sorry, I don't buy into hype like that. I don't automatically think, "most expensive=The BEST" perhaps it is, but that don't mean I am willing to buy it. For starters, I don't have the cash, but even if I did, I would spend it on other things.
OK, so prices are getting closer (wonder if prices will go up now that HD-DVD is out?) But even then, HD-DVD still has a better price tag IMO. For years, Sony was always the most expensive brand out there, and too often heard people say things like "Sony is the best... If you don't have a Sony, you are missing out etc..."
I mean, everything, shoes, pants, electronics, cars, etc. all have their brand names that cost more, and usually aren't any better than no name brands, most of the time, using same components as the cheaper brands (or even being produced in same plant). So IMO expensive/brand name doesn't mean good, great, or better than cheaper no name brands (of course, Brand names can be good and cheap brands crap).
To the OP, I think this is such a polarization because both sides buy into the hype and gimmicks of their respective camp. I mean, HD-DVD isn't better, certainly doesn't have the "future proofing" as Blu-Ray has (space wise). Blu-Ray likewise doesn't have the best software (either can't be upgraded, doesn't have the interactive features, lacks features, etc.) and even now, is the most expensive to invest in (movies cost the same, but hardware is different) as far as initial cost. Also, just because more movies are on Blu-Ray, doesn't automatically make it the better of the two.
Finally, I've only invested $179 in HD-DVD add-on for 360, have 6 movies that were free, along with renting two movies at $4.99 a piece. So about $200 investment for me. Not a big loss, certainly worth it. As far as upgrading to Blu-Ray, that will happen when I can afford it, which will likely be at least two more years.
