Majority rule.  No one had to buy the PS3 or had to buy Blu-ray.  Consumers were given an option and they chose.  Don't blame Sony or Blu-ray supporters because you backed the losing side.  Just like if MS had somehow completely crushed the PS3 and Sony dropped out of the console market.  I still would think the PS3 was the better system, but I sure as heck wouldn't blame MS.  Sony screwed up and consumers would have chosen MS. 

And your point about shelf space makes no sense.  I said it comes in the same case.  In other words, it takes up no extra space.  It's just 2 discs in one case, like those 2 disc DVDs.  And you can just put the DVD in your DVD player. 

Interesting topic. It seems to me that the best hardware is no longer the major determinate in "futureproof". I mean the Wii has outsold both by quite the margin by avoiding the HD twin's strenghts and finding its own market. Xbox could secure itself a stronger future as long as it finds a way to appeal to a broad range of audience.

OK you seem to be missing the point somewhat so for one final time I will try and explain the situation as it was back then. The consumer did not choose Blu Ray Sony did, they decided that to play games on the Playstation you would need a Blu Ray disc. The consumer did not make this decision it was Sony's based on there requirements and needs.

HD DVD was in fact the only paltform selling players in any number. The PS3 was a console that could also play HD content via Blu Ray discs. It was the companies providing content that decided ultimately what platform to have and it was Warner Brothers eventual climb down.

Lastly the HD DVD disc itself was capable of having one side DVD and one side HD DVD. This meant 1 disc not two and towards the end it was common for disc to contain both formats. It may be that some discs today come with a DVD inside the box but this is not the norm, I would suggest that this was the direction HD DVD was heading and so it probably would of become the norm and would of allowed the easier migration of content to HD. HD DVD was also normally cheaper than Blu Ray.

So now that I have laboured the point the consumer did not choose Blu Ray the content providers did.

Sony did kill off HD DVD but I will not droan on about that you should just look up the history and who was in what camp and what allegiances they had to Sony and you should find that out for yourself.

They released a year later. Us Americans don't like to wait, so a lot of people just ran out and got the first console available. I'm glad I waited.

Go Download a smallish game from Steam. I have 20 Mbit Down (best you can get in my area), and it still takes freaking forever. I wanna be able to pop a disk in, and play the game. You gotta realize that not everybody is a uber-nerd who wants everything to be downloaded. People like owning their disks. And you do realize that if Valve decided to shut down Steam today, they could? And everybody would lose their purchases, and online multiplayer for all Steam-based games would be shut down. Yep. Download is SURELY the way to go.

I downloaded civ 5 and it took around a day... whoopadee do. I have a much slower connection. I can do around 12gb or something in a day.

1080P HD Movies stream instantly via Zune on the Xbox no waiting no Blu Ray disc in sight, isn't technology wonderful. Secondly OnLive allows you to play games instantly, no Blu Ray or for that matter console in sight. The problem with these two scenarios is does not sit will with we need huge Blu Ray discs. 

Lastly the point about ownership is probably one for the old timers to talk about going forward subscription and cloud based storage solutions will become dominant. You might not like it but thats progress, not everyone is able to accept change so I am sure you will be accomodated for some years to come.

What is clear to me is that this generation of HD consoles have a lot to give. You cannot write them off based on what they had in them at the start. They are more modular and flexible, today Kinect is showing how an attachment really can lengthen the validity of the product. PS3 could well come up with someting yet I still think it has like the Xbox some years to go before they start talking about replacing this generation. I have not voted on the future proof option as I actually think both the consoles show promise of future proofing.

I actually voted for false but some of the reasoning is simply bollocks

Thats not what I meant, ill explain it better: Both 360 and PS3 have similar results worlwide but PS3 is more diversify while having those result. That doesnt automatically mean it will live longer, its just less risky that way. Where the expression to not have all your eggs in the same basket.

I wasnt specifically talking of Kinect but of being very front loaded in only one market, but well, its in large part due to Kinect (not sure how much though) so you could always count that as not as diversify, but that wasnt specifically my point since I dont have any hard numbers on that ; ).

I've explained why DD sucks compared to blu ray and you just ignore it and keep saying the same BS over again  I've stating that the codecs are insignificant and you ignore that point, and again higher quality pictures take more space 4GB movies are not the same quality has 20GB ones, thats a fact and I didn't say square said it I said the devs said it, of course square was trying to make you think it had nothing to do with it, first you don't believe square then you believe them what the hell? And why the hell do you need a link, you can't have mandatory installs with a skew that doesn't have a harddrive why are you so dense?