If both formats are a wash, then neutrality makes sense. It doesn't matter who gets our money if the products are the same.

However, if one format is superior to the other, then why be neutral instead of voting for the better format with your pocketbooks, to avoid getting saddled with the lesser format for the next 15 years? I see format neutrality as senseless political correctness in a forum that has gotten too dogmatic.

So, err, don't be ashamed if you're not neutral! :)

---
Edit: I am not trying to incite further warfare between the two HD camps. What I meant to say is that I don't understand people who proudly state that they're "format neutral". It doesn't seem entirely rational to me. *Resigning* oneself to neutrality does make some sense, though.

Phat

I'm neutral, but I barely even rent hddvd's anymore. It'll be BD only as much as possible. I doubt highly I'll buy anymore hddvds unless Battlestar series is released on it.. Or Jurassic Park.

I've got both formats and I've been voting with my wallet. And as of right now, in my household, HD DVD is the clear winner.

Blu Ray may be the better format but the level of consistancy is not sharp as the HD DVD group. I get the feeling that out of the BD exclusive studios only Disney and Lionsgate know what they are doing with regard to BD transfers.

In 15 years both Blu-ray and HD DVD will look like old relics. The time of formats lasting much more than a decade are over. Look at DVD it's barely been over a decade and they are being phased out. I figure the successor has about 8 years before it's on its way to being replaced.

I'm neutral, but I barely even rent hddvd's anymore. It'll be BD only as much as possible. I doubt highly I'll buy anymore hddvds unless Battlestar series is released on it.. Or Jurassic Park.

This is neutrality only in the most basic sense of the word. But hey at least you have access to all movies.

The problem with superiority is defining it in a way that translates to others. To my eyes both formats look great at their best. Some people "want" to be able to see the differences caused by perceived advantages in storage and bandwidth but the eyes don't lie. Excellent quality can be had from both platforms.

I find that neutrality is in fact desirable from my perspective because as a consumer I simply want access to all packaged HD media. Where I draw the line however is in what I perceive as value. Initially pre PS3 the value equation of Blu-ray was pretty poor IMO. Today however if you have an inkling to game a bit then the PS3 isn't a bad solution nor is a Xbox 360 with HD DVD drive attached.

The studios have clung to the dogma more than consumers.

I've got both formats and I've been voting with my wallet. And as of right now, in my household, HD DVD is the clear winner.

Blu Ray may be the better format but the level of consistancy is not sharp as the HD DVD group. I get the feeling that out of the BD exclusive studios only Disney and Lionsgate know what they are doing with regard to BD transfers.

It's kind of true on DVD, too. Disney has some crazy, greedy ideas, but they usually deliver decent quality.

...if one format is superior to the other...
How do you define which format is superior? I would define it by which format has the most titles that I want to watch.

I'm not neutral, but I don't hunger for the other format to die. It's the studios that should be neutral, then they could let us choose based on quality, price, and what type of history we have with the companies behind the products.

I also just started buying HD DVD less than a month ago, I'd do it again too. In fact the next price drop and I'm upgrading to the XA2 because my next (ironically Sony) projector will be 1080p.

Neither camp is putting out enough movies that I'll be out much if it all fizzles.

How do you define which format is superior? I would define it by which format has the most titles that I want to watch.

That's not superiority, it's political positioning.

That's not superiority, it's political positioning.

You have to look at the specs to figure out which format is superior.

You can break it down to the following:

1) Which format is technically superior? (Storage space, transfer rate)
2) Which has the most content? (# of Movies)
3) Which has the best content? (Best Movies)
4) Best quality? (PQ,AQ)
5) Which is the most popular? (Numbers, talk on the street)
6) Which format has cheaper hardware? (Overall, can't throw out PS3)
7) Which format has cheaper software?
8) Which one do you want for your data needs? (This is what is important to me)

I also don't believe the early choice of Blu-Ray on the studios part had anything to do with politics. Blu-Ray was the first design with a blue laser, and it seemed to have the security features the studios wanted. It looks like they picked the logical choice for the next gen format for themselves. Toshiba came up(out) with HD DVD a year later, and the studios had either already decided or were in the middle of deciding.

If you think their choice is political, you should do some research on how Sony compromised and agreed to the DVD format. You should research the history of Blu-Ray and HD DVD. See who's first, see who didn't compromise, see who is choosing sides when they could care less about the movie industry.

That's not superiority, it's political positioning.If you think their choice is political, you should do some research... You should research the history of Blu-Ray and HD DVD.

So, here is some history for Timothy:

Sony and Toshiba (and everyone else) were in the same camp. Virtually no one went the Toshiba route because Toshiba got greedy. All the members of the BDA were part of the development consortium that Toshiba built in the early days. Toshiba actually chaired the DVD Forum, of which Sony was a part. Toshiba had everyone on board with their SDD/Super Density Disc, but they wanted huge royalties out of it. So, Sony and Philips continued to develop a format they had in the works *long* before IBM, Toshiba, or Panasonic had the SDD and what became the Advanced Optical Disc. The ProDATA disc that Sony/Philips developed way back in 1995 became Blu-ray, and was implemented and part of the professional environment well before Toshiba had even thought of HD DVD as a consumer format.

I also don't believe the early choice of Blu-Ray on the studios part had anything to do with politics.Even if the decision was "political", why should I screw myself out of 20 GB of capacity and 18Mbps of bandwidth?

The reason HD DVD supporters use these silly arguments is because they have nothing else to support their side.

Its all about the exclusives when you have both. Right now I have just HDDVD but plan on getting a BD player. Either in the form of a PS3 (if they ever get good games) or a standalone.

But say in 5-10 years 1 side fails. I still own all those discs and the player. Their still HD.
I'd guess the winning side(if their is one). Will create a duel player that can play both. So at that point, if the player is good, ill buy that and sell the old own.

But in either case you still have discs. So whi cares if they faill I'm still very happy with my 28 HDDVDs. Ill never sell them, even if the other format gets. It. But I'd guess the losing side won't start creating movies for the other side for awhile after atleast a year.

But one has to consider what if neither side wins. Both format
s may reamain neiche the whole time.

DVD May win out overall. Many don't have the TVs for HD. And if they do they nay not care. A person said to me, when he was at best buy he was looking at BD vs DVD. He saw the diffrence but didn't care. He had 500+ movies. And didn't want to replace any.

Looking for technical superiority is silly. Specs can change right from under us. Looking for studio support is silly as well. BR should have a huge lead, but its only really marginal at this point, and major release from either side can turn things around.

Sad to say, but nobody in this thread or this forum is going to decide this mess. Its completely out of our hands.

Those of us here who decide to go neutral is doing so to have access and freedom to the largest possible library of content as possible.
I dont think anyone here advises ppl to go "neutral" do they?
Buying one format is pretty nuts in the current environment, buying both is madness. There is no one in my immediate circle of friends/family that i would advise buying either format right now.
I have both because Im stupid.

Even if the decision was "political", why should I screw myself out of 20 GB of capacity and 18Mbps of bandwidth?

The reason HD DVD supporters use these silly arguments is because they have nothing else to support their side.


Really, nobody has to justify their choice to you.

I buy massive amounts of movies, I know who has supported my interests and delivered quality, and in turn who I want to support. If I thought there were real-world differences in performance, I'd be swayed, but there aren't.

HD DVD is a tighter ship than BD, they have delivered what they promised, and I admire HD DVD economics more than BD. I don't think the 51 GB disk is needed, but if it comes to pass the "bandwidth" argument will be meaningless (to me it already is).

Studios made their support choices based on a products before they existed, it means nothing to me when they boast about supporting the "superior" format, because it's all hindsight as they scramble to retrofit that claim to how their choices are actually performing.

I default to BD now since it's the only way I can enjoy the HD Audio formats and uncompressed PCM is just such a beautiful thing.

If I go through with getting an XA1, I might go back to having to make a decision on a title by title basis.

I'm format neutral, rent mostly from Netflix, and base purchase decisions on a case-by-case basis depending on price (avoid combos), codec/PQ, AQ, etc.

I think that the war helped push for better product and is therefore a good thing initially. Looks HD-DVD camp (and Microsoft) invested resources into getting great VC-1 PQ product out there and that really helped drive initial sales (coupled with high BD player prices). I also think that as a result, BD only studios have had to improve their releases PQ (even Sony going with mpeg4 titles). And the players have had to drop a lot in order to gain traction. This all adds up to a good thing initially.

Now, if most/all studios would release on both formats, I think that everyone would win except maybe the stores which have to use more shelf space/inverntory. The sooner they do this, the sooner a truce occurs, more universal players hit the market and J6P can buy either. That will drive down media prices and eventually DVD would go the way of VHS.

Format neutrality feels pretty sweet to me. I love not having to worry about which studio puts out a movie. Others can duke it out all they want - I'll just watch movies in HD. :D