Isn't it pretty obvious that so long as (1) a large segment of PS3 purchasers (if not an outright majority) are buying it primarily as a Blu-ray player and are not purchasing games and (2) the PS3 costs more to build, advertise, develop, etc. than they are charging for it, that the division will bleed money. This state of affairs has little to do with whether or not the PS3 is a "success" as a gaming platform. Time will tell on that I suppose. I do think that Sony probably made material miscalculations about how quickly the manufacturing costs would fall and how many games per console would be bought annually. Otherwise I doubt that management would have supported the development cost and the pricing. Given all the sunk costs I don't see how they could walk away from the gaming division at this point, though.

Scott - my understanding is that the HDMI 1.3 protocol will not exceed the bandwidth of any recent HDMI cable. And, unless you are using the HDMI cable to carry the new seven channel surround formats to a receiver or pre/pro (none of which yet exist) along with full 1080p60 video, you have nothing to worry about anyway. Worst case scenario if a recent cable doesn't have that much bandwidth is that you use HDMI to carry the video exclusively, and use a digital coax cable for the sound. I've been very impressed with monoprice cables and wouldn't ever consider anything else except for very long runs (e.g., 25 feet or more).

check this out for more info: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/other/cable-benchmark/hdmi-cable-benchmark.html

Until they announce plans for a digital out, the 1080p output is just noise. The only displays that I can think of that accept 1080p over component are 7, 8, or 9 inch CRT analog projectors. And, let me tell you, the xbox 360 demographic doesn't overlap much with the owners of old school Sony projectors.

Makes me consider running my 360 over VGA if I get a 1080p TV. Hmm....

OtakuCODE - Do you want a cookie for mentioning G.G. Allin or something? How f*cking old are you? Did you ever even go to G.G. show?

Michael - I remember the successes: it's just that Sony has been way behind the curve for several years now. For a 480i or 480p tube television, trinitron still can't be beat and the DVD players that Sony was putting out in 1999 were fantastic compared to the rest of the market. But, let's face it, they blew it by not adopting DLP, their LCOS solution hit the market late and is still outrageously expensive, Sony doesn't manufacture a DVD player worth sh*t at this point (there is no Sony DVD player that can beat a $150 Oppo player), and Blu-ray delays are just killing the format. Never mind that they still haven't figured out how to make a decent MP3 player for the US market. I was a blu-ray super fan and HD-DVD hater for so long while my feelings were guided by pre-release hype, but in all honesty the delivery of blu-ray has been pathetic and the new Toshiba HD-DVD players set for release in December look to be killer. The new XBR LCDs look great, but are just too expensive compared to other viewing options. People have learned to look past Sony and start doing hard analysis of how their products stack up, rather than just trusting that if it had their name on it, it was a killer product (like I used to).

Look, I'm an xbox 360 fan, and probably won't get a PS3 for at least a year, but to scrutinize this sheet like it's part of their financial statements is just ridiculous. to the extent this obfuscates the issues and leads to more sales for the PS3, congrats to their marketers. god knows that microsoft has no problem doing the same thing.

Personally, I hate re-chargeable controllers. I prefer to just leave the controllers in the coffee table and replace the batteries when the controller dies. I think my wife will kill me if I add a recharger to our living room....I already catch enough sh*t for the universal remote charger.

Hopefully a third-party controller with replaceable batteries will come out, and hopefully it will be comfortable like the 360 controller, by the time I pick up my PS3.

Laughing Target - Are you an idiot? Where in the world did you get the idea that Microsoft paid a dividend of $132/share. All of Microsoft's dividends ever paid don't even equal 4 dollars, including the gigantic $3/share dividend in 2005. From wikipedia:

"While the company has had nine stock splits, the first of which was in September 18, 1987, the company did not start offering a dividend until January 16, 2003. The dividend for the 2003 fiscal year was eight cents per share, followed by a dividend of sixteen cents per share the subsequent year. The company switched from yearly to quarterly dividends in 2005, for eight cents a share per quarter with a special one-time payout of three dollars per share for the second quarter of the fiscal year."

Also, for people who think Microsoft is a well run company and a good investment, compare the stock performance against the DJIA over the past 2 years:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=MSFT&t=2y&l=off&z=m&q=l&c=%5EDJI

Granted, it's a way better investment than Sony and the company is in great financial shape, but the street isn't so sure they are going to spend their reserve cash as intelligently as other companies and that MS will continue to dominate the IT landscape (or their market cap would be much higher). I'm grateful that they've blown so much money on Xbox, though, as I love Halo and I love my 360. Bring on Assassin's Creed, baby.

6 player Marathon deathmatches over the LAN in my dorm during my freshman year of college was pure joy. Oh, to experience that thrill again (with updated textures?). The SPNKR rocket launcher was the weapon that really set the early standard for arena weapons.

Is there anyone working at ESRB who could have beaten Ikaruga? I doubt it. I guess "professional" video game players who wash out from the circuit could end up with a job at the ESRB.