But Universal didn't cut those corners when designing HP.
The bias in your posts seems to soar higher with every reply. You aren't making a real attempt here at a comparison of the two parks. You're attempting to make Disney look bad an Universal look good. Anyone can make that argument in either direction. You accuse so many here of being "Disney apologists", though you yourself are quite the Universal "apologist".
For starters, the pictures and article you posted are from
Disneyland Paris, which, like I said in the other thread...is not what we are talking about. This article says "Disney World". It is comparing Disney World to Universal Orlando. It's not likely many of us have been to Disneyland Paris or Universal Singapore, so how likely are any of us to be able to give an accurate review of either? It's mostly going to be hearsay. Comparing the maintenance at Disneyland Paris, built in 1992, to Wizarding World in Orlando, built in 2010, isn't exactly apples to apples. Forget the fact that Walt Disney Company only owns a minority stake in Paris. In other words, they don't even run the park. I'm reading in several articles that the disrepair there is leading Disney to consider buying them out, but they have yet to do so.
As for the idea in your posts that big bad Disney is such a POS company while Universal can do no wrong, and cuts no corners...let's get at that. Why is Olivander's in Hogsmeade? It wasn't that way in the movies, or the books. Universal can claim it's "another franchise" all they want, but the simple fact is they forced an attraction to a place it didn't belong because they were either too lazy at the time to build Diagon ally, or weren't willing to spend the cash. My wife's biggest complaint with the place was that they make it seem like its some huge area, where in reality, most of the storefronts are just for looks and there are only a couple shops and a restaurant. My complaint, on the other hand was the place is just boring. What is so amazing about a different styled "Main Street USA", except with less shops and mostly false storefronts and a dark ride is beyond me. The castle is impressive, but so are the two new castles at WDW. They didn't take the time to build new rollercoasters, they just renamed and rethemed two existing ones.
Now, I'm not the one going to a Universal forum and trashing Universal's parks while spreading Disney propaganda. I don't care for Universal, but they aren't bad, and I certainly don't see how anyone could make the argument that they are leaps ahead of Disney. I don't see a huge difference between the two parks as far as they do things. I think Disney does it better, but then again, I like Disney, and I admit my bias. I think Coke does it better too, but I don't see some ridiculous difference with Pepsi and I'll gladly drink it if there is no Coke.
No, I'm pointing out that what Universal is doing with its new (truly new, not refurbished/"expanded" stuff like so-called "new" Fantasyland) is at a standard easily equivalent to the best Disney has to offer.
Like slapping a new name on Dueling Dragons and Flight of the Hippogriff and calling them new attractions? Like I said, New Fantasyland has more "new" things than Wizarding World will have, even after it's Diagon Ally addition. You might not like them, but that doesn't change the fact that they are new. The train station and Barnstormer are remodeled. What else are your referring to?
We will get to my Pizza Planet/Ollivanders comparison in a moment.
Another apples to oranges point. Comparing a random quick service experience (which I've never heard of or noticed before, movie or theme park, and I go a lot) to one of the headlining attractions at Universal. Comparing Gaston's or Be Our Guest would be a better comparison. Those are both restaurants, but Disney has no new headlining attraction type store, so that's the best comparison you can make.
But first, if so-called "new" Fantasyland is so great, why is it getting a general yawn from so many here? I'll tell you why: it's underwhelming fluff. A meet and greet (wow) a duplication of an existing platform ride and a woefully delayed mine coaster. You ballyhoo this as ground breaking, while the competition develops and opens truly new major attractions.
Once again, as said in the other post, the numbers disagree with your assessment.
As for Carsland, yes, it's the one decent addition Iger has made. But it's off in California which does squat for WDW visitors.
Ohhh, now you dismiss something for being in a different park. Where was this logic when you were posting pictures and articles from Disneyland Paris and commenting on resorts being built in Hawaii?
HD screens with coordinated moving imagery to take you on a fantasy journey through the English countryside is going to be a heck of a lot more innovative than the grossly overdue "Mine Train" at the so-called "new" Fantasyland.
Don't you have better things to do? 
