DTS or Dolby?

What are the differences between these two? I like DTS better because it "sounds better" to me. However I fail to explain why it sounds better in term of techicality. I made a research but the results don't satisfy me. Most of them explain what each does but don't give detailed comparison between the two. I understand there has been a war between DTS and Dolby. They update their technologies every minute (Their newest versions are DTS HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD as far as I know.) But if DTS is better like everybody (and myself) says, why does Dolby still survive all along? There have to be some reasons, haven't it! What do you say about this matter?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I say it's a stalemate debate that has been going on between audiophiles since 1993.

Most amazing jew boots

Dolby Digital is arguably more efficient and accurate, but many prefer DTS because it is mixed hotter, has the capability of higher bandwidth, and lacks Dolby's enforced dialnorm.

Not everyone prefers DTS, but Dolby has been around for so long because they are practically synonymous with the concept of surround sound.

For the latest codecs, I think Dolby dropped the ball...I prefer DTS Master Audio over TrueHD. Even though it is more of a resource hog, Master Audio always comes with a core 1.5mbps, so it will sound good even on standard receivers that only come equipped with S/PDIF...plus there isn't any signal attenuation.

Try Transporter 2's Master Audio track to see what it is all about (even at 1.5mbps)...put my Mackies into the red tonight when I ran them large and pumped up the clinic gunfight scene.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.