SACD and DVD-A:why so negative, "guru"?

"Even if DVD-A and SACD die -and I sincerely hope they join
DCC and DAT, and take a few callus, cynical companies as they cross the Styx -normal DVD players are so umbi-quitous and the good ones so competent with 16-bit CD that only a spendthrift would buy a CD-only player in future."

This quote is from a review of the Audio Research CD3(CDP),
in the february(2002) issue of Hi-Fi News. The author
is the well-known and well-respected(?)reviewer Martin Colloms.
To me , such statements adds to my already sceptical attitude toward reviewers.Colloms is not the only one
who believes, that a highly developed (and expencive)CD-player is quite enought to achieve a splendid sound in a
system.
I´ll readily admit that there are some great CDP around,
although usually at high prices, and Collums review may
be seen as a tribute to these remainders of "the old
technology".

But let me question the purpose of taking a negative attitude towards innovations. These innovations may - in the long run, very well be accepted as a step forward, by the audio-society,in concensus.

Some more examples of such negative attitudes.
A swedish guru, and a leader of what I regard as an audio-sect, here in Sweden, meant that SACD would sound worse
than CD, even before he was able to listening to the former. Some other european reviewers now and then write,
that there seems to be no need for the new formats.
Well, one can say that everybody has the right to have their
opinions.
But then I have to say to the majority of reviewers, I don´t
trust you.Most of you make things quite a bit more simple
than reality, and to me, it is often obvious that you are
not questioning yourselfs enough!
A simple example, is it really true, that it´s a good thing
to place a floorstanding speaker on spikes...mmmm I´ll come
back to this.

Regards
Håkan Ståhl