If they really want one format, it should be the one who has the most software sales, no?
No. It should be the format with 20 additional gigs of space and 1.5x the bandwidth of the other format. Sales up until now reflect the lead-time that HD DVD has had in the market place with early-adoptors, not some larger reflection of which format will succeed when BD market penetration has taken root.
BD hasn't even gotten going yet. When BD-Java gets fully implimented by mid-summer, we'll see BD releases that really start to shine. *That* will be when it's time to start to compare formats, and see which one looks better in terms of featuresets etc.
HD DVD got an early start because it required much less retooling and because Sony mis-managed their development (shocking us all
). The early-release of BD was only to keep HD DVD from having a big-lead on-paper, but had HD DVD not already launched the BD group would probably have waited until HDMI 1.3 availability and BD-J to launch. In other words, BD's release has been incremental, and is still gaining a foothold as the specs come on-line.
The reason these studios support BD is because, when fully realized (as it will be by mid-summer), it's the better format. The studios are taking a longer-term view of this thing. And so are many HD enthusiasts.
What more proof do you want about the market preference as if 2006's data was not convincing enough?
I fail to see how last-year's data with BD not even fully implimented has anything to do with the projection of future sales.
I think it should be obvious that they think it should be the one with
the most future software sales, not the most past software sales. Of
course the future is a guess/estimate/or whatever you want to call it,
but if one was leading by a huge margin, then other one caught up and
has a higher run-rate, then the 2:1 margin doesn't look that good going