Originally Posted by JukeBox360
Because it doesn't compete with blu ray. Even the advertising for it against blu ray was a joke and flat out lie. Fact. The more room you have for your data the better it can look. HDDVD had no benefit at all towards blu ray. It would have had better success if it was abavaible like 7 years before blu ray.
What a crock, save your bias for someone else.
1) Blu-ray puts everything on 50GB discs; that's right, they don't as there are numerous movies on 25GB discs.
2) It all fits on to a 50GB disc so there is no need to put a movie on two discs. Again false as there are several movies you have to swap discs for.
3) All Blu-ray versions look better than their HD-DVD counterpart. Wrong again.
Space wasn't an issue, especially considering that HD-DVD was working on larger capacity discs.
"It would have had better success if it was available like 7 years before Blu-ray" They both launched when they should have. If Blu-ray hadn't come out for another seven years after that, there would be no Blu-ray as HD-DVD would be firmly embedded.
My first HD player was an XA2, purchased strictly because of Spartacus (and wasn't that a piece of cra*). So yes, I had money invested in the format (and I still have it, as well as the 40 titles or so I bought for it to play). However, they lost as did Betamax so I moved on. At this point I have five Blu-ray players, three PS3s and two stand-alones.
They were both comparable products; one lost and one didn't.