Why, at your friendly competitor, "anti-sony tard" console's site, of course!

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/marketplace/moviestv/comedycentral.htm

Quick question: are all non-sony lovers "anti-sony tards" or do you just have a habit of throwing blanket-wide 'tarded insults like that? To quote a VGChartz member: "I find that HIGHLY offensive"...

That's not the point I wanted to stress: The point was there are in fact HD-DVD players out there that are considerably cheaper than the cheapest Blu-Ray player on the market. Put another way: Is Blu-Ray really twice as good as HD-DVD to warrant paying double the price for a player?

Whether the quality is better or not is not the issue - there are DVD players ranging anywhere from less than 15 bucks all the way up to about 3000 bucks.

I have zero doubt in my mind that the 3000-dollar DVD player is better on all fronts compared to a sub-15-dollar DVD player. The question is: is it worth the extra 2985 dollars?

No. Not for me. Not for most people. Not for all but the most stinking rich technophiles who really have nothing better to do with their money - at all. Ditto that for HD media.

http://electronics.pricegrabber.com/dvd-players/m/21686882/details/

vs

http://electronics.pricegrabber.com/dvd-players/m/17631483/details/

Edit: This isn't about comparing cheap players or anything of the sort. My comment was addressing Blue3's remark:

"They for the most part get the same reviews, you can get a BR player for 469.99 on amazon.  Wheres a hddvd player for $235 ? Toshiba care more LOL."

I just showed him that in fact, $235 HD-DVD players are in fact available in the market right now, and that isn't even the cheapest model available; the $400+ Blu-Ray player, in contrast, is the absolute cheapest on on the market right now.

I can see your reason why u ignore the companies that Sony own. But sorry, it doesnt work when you are comparing the number of studios for each camp. It is not just Universal  Vs Fox and Disney. It is Universal Vs Fox, Disney, Columbia and MGM. Just that Sony owns them doesnt mean they do not make movies. I was looking at the Universal list.... Their have less blockbuster hits than the other 4 combined!

The irony here is...... PS3(BD) is looking like HD DVD now. hahaha...... They both lack content and support from publishers.

Yes, I agree that Hollywood will not release on them. But do you think the Chinese needs Hollywood to release on their format? lol!! They will just decode and extract the movie from BD or HD DVD, recode in their own format. Cheap HD movies, Cheap Players, and a market bigger than US and Europe combined!

Another thing that people forget about digital distribution is that the content can easily adapt to new technology. Both formats are more or less "fixed" with the codecs, ect they can offer. However, digital could offer 10.2 sound, 1200p and so on very easily, minus the increased file size.

Bittorrent and usenet already have tons of films in HD not yet out on either format. For those who say "it takes forever to download" - not really. Five years ago a dvd rip took several days, but I can download an HD film in less time than I can get it from Amazon(a site with very cheap blu/hddvd prices)

And tell every one those are USED hddvd player prices.

 fud, never goes away.

you can get a BR player for $349 right now on ebay.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Samsung-BD-P1000-Blu-Ray-Disc-Player_W0QQitemZ270128275870QQihZ017QQcategoryZ617QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Dude, let's get real - straight from your very own link:

"Hi you are looking at an like New Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-Ray Disc Player..."

I guess I'll have to start finding 'like new" HD-DVD players, eh? At least my pricegrabber search result lists new players for both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray (just trying to be objective here)...

Who's spreading the FUD again?

Also noticed you tacked on another sentence after your original post... anyone care to point it out?

Ok, first of all, the microsoft side of the fence is saying digital, or BluRay. The Nintendo side is saying HD-DVD. I am not throwing insults at the microsoft boys. (for once)

Just for your all information, a 21minute video of SouthPark at 480i should be almost an identical size of SouthPark at 1080p. Running h.264, the file-size would be fairly close to being the same. I know the current formats out there.

Also, for those of you saying 1440p and such as new formats, with 10.1 audio.

The new digital movie theaters run 2048x1080. 1080p is 1960x1080. Not that much of a diffrence.

1440p runs 2560x1440. Quite a bit higher than the new digital movie theaters. The old film theaters dont look quite as crisp as the new digital ones. I dont think the commercial movie industry will improve beyond that for the next few years. (10-20years)

1440p is stupid and senseless.

7.1 is stupid and senseless, fuck 10.1

It's a proven fact that a properly setup 5.1 sounds almost identical to a 7.1

I dont know how many of you deal with compressing/de-compressing and online file transportation...

But I can tell you. h.264's compression is too low for streaming HQ 720p on a 5mbit line. Screw a 1080p. You would need over a 20mbit connection, and I would hate to see the servers that provide that much data. I dont know how many of you have looked into doing a webserver, but most of the ones that I know that not very many of them allow you over 10gb of data/month.

I have trouble dreaming of a server that can send data almost as fast as your HDD in your computer, to around 100,000 people at a time. That sounds like YouTube x10,000.

and sieanr about downloading it off BT. I dont know what kind of internet connection that you have, but I spent around 48hours downloading my HD download off BT, and it was only 720p. Also, I will confess, it was NOT lossless.

I mean it was free and all, but not if I paid 20-30$ for it... no-way in hell would I wait over 2 hours to download it. And then I would want to be able to archive my stuff... however I would be looking at 10 movies on a 200$ HDD. So add 20$ to each movie for data storage. Even if you could download it at full quality. It would still cost roughly 30$ in todays market. I'm sure in 3 years that would be cheaper... but then agian, so will BluRays. 

I don't think the time is right to adopt either format (Unless it's the format of your console of choice). When the hybrid players come out, and are at a reasonable price it will be time.

I hit around 1mb from usenet, with really good torrents also reaching that speed. And with a bit of work, you can get untouched bluray and HDDVD rips, as well as very high quality broadcast grabs.