Ignorance must be bliss.  HD-DVD was superior to Blu-Ray in almost every conceivable way.  I'm sorry you are to blind to see that.  This is not fanboyism or trolling, it is fact based on their own capabilities, specs, etc at the time before HD-DVD was discontinued.

Seriously, you are only continuously making yourself look even more foolish.

@nightsurge

yeah, you seem to know it all. I think I will make you my God, lol. All hail nightsurge!

I don't know it all.  But feel free to praise me.  I just pity that you think you know things that you don't, and are too lazy to find out otherwise.  Oh well, ignorance is bliss as they say.  All hail NightSurge!

Reasons why HD-DVD was better:

• HD-DVD players were cheaper to purchase
• HD-DVD players were unified spec (all had networking support long befor it became common place in Blu-Ray players and for much cheaper still)
• HD-DVD discs/movies were cheaper
• HD-DVD drives had faster read speeds than Blu-Ray
• HD-DVD used similar pressing technology to DVD so it was easy to manufacture and easy to produce combo HD-DVD/DVD discs.  (I had 300 which was a combo HD-DVD/DVD disc for only $5 more than the standard DVD back in the day, for example)

The only place that Blu-Ray lead was in overall capacity, but even then it was only a slim margin.  HD-DVDs were going to be expanded to 64GB of space per disc and even higher, but they didn't last long enough.  Blu-Ray won the HD war because it claimed the majority of support from movie publishers and it had the added benefit of being a gaming platform as well.

In addition to this, its quite possible that the yields on the 45nm RSX chips aren't as good as what they'd like at present considering the shortages and delays in getting the 45nm RSX into production quantities. Overall even now the PS3 is still likely more expensive to produce than the Xbox 360 Elite, and thats factoring in the 45nm RSX reduction, then on top of that you'd have to also consider the $10 charge for Blu Ray playback etc and likely Nvidia stiffing them on royalties.

The Xbox 360 Slim looks pretty dirt cheap to produce. Between a significant reduction in board complexity, those trace lines between the CPU/GPU are expensive and using 1Gbit GDDR3 as well as cutting the silicon costs in half  along with reduced power supply and heat disipation complexity, it'll probably be at least a $50 saving. If Microsoft were to be interested, they could possibly sell the Xbox 360 for less than $299 without taking more than a marginal loss on the console with Natal.

oh Lord I've seen the lights!

Well, how about that Patcher, he's been way off before right?

This is derailing the thred quite a bit don't you think. Anyway, I posted my replies to all that nonsense you spouted, lol.

MSFT should have learned from sony.....adding features and keeping your price point DOES NOT equate to a price cut in consumer minds.

MSFT would be much better off dropping the price to $250 for the 120 gig and then maybe a 250gb natal bundle for $350 or something.

IF MSFT wants to treat Natal like anew console launch however, theyre going to have a rough time upping the price, so its probably going to have to stay at $299 for the bundle....and then in that sense i think theres a lot to be said for the difference in consumers minds when it comes to adding features but keeping the entry price the same.

It may not be a good decision, but if they are committed to bundling, they may just have to release the bundle at $299 but theyll have to drop an SKU to $250, imo.

for once he makes some sense and could be true.

Thats all such a bother. Funny thing is thus far Sony probably lost more on Blu Ray than Toshiba lost on HD-DVD. Oh and Toshiba also scored a neat set of fabs which Sony had spent billions upgrading for a mere pittance which probably more than offset their HD-DVD losses. Winner, Toshiba!!!!

You gotta love the internet. You come in expecting a thread about Natal but the last few pages are a bunch of quotes about the tech specs of HD-DVD. How on Earth did it come to this?