This is why people think you troll sometimes- you make a response specifically to get a reaction and bait.
He didn't say Blu-ray was better, worse, Less expensive, more expensive, more convenient, less convenient, etc.
He simply said optimum quality for sound and video- which can't be disputed. Regardless of if someone can or can't tell the difference is unconsequential- but what he said is still true. And I def. Prefer it for certain movies (not all)
I agree. When I want the ultimate in quality (not that Blu-ray is perfect) for a film I'm going to watch more than once, I buy Blu-ray. I'm realistic enough to understand that physical formats will eventually disappear, but that doesn't mean they're not better. There are only a few cases where consumers chose quality over convenience. Just because Apple chose not to support it doesn't mean it's not a technically superior format. Of course if you're watching on an iPhone, iPad or even a computer screen, it probably doesn't make much difference. At small sizes, even SD looks acceptable.
As for Amazon, it doesn't really bother me that you can't pre-order titles from the companies they're in dispute with. What counts is whether they'll make the titles available at the time they're released. If they don't, then I agree that they're abusing their power and I also agree with those who feel that the publishers and distributors should take a strong stand and pull ALL their titles from Amazon. There'd be some short-term hurt, but they'd be much better off in the long term as consumers would have to go to other sites or (gasp!) an actual physical retail store. It would help to kill Amazon's arrogance and if people got in the habit of ordering elsewhere, it would reduce their dominance. But the publishers are probably too chicken to pull this off.