It was always paid for, therefore invoking a psychosomatic reaction and smug sense of self-satisfaction!  

I wish I was joking, but that seems to be the deal.  

Objectively?  Uh, XBL had cross game chat last generation, and the downloads were a bit faster and more stable. For actual online play, no difference whatsoever, I found.  and I had XBL Gold for three years before giving up, admitting it was a ripoff. 

i know but i want him to answer. how is live better than PSN? i heard it a billion times before, yet no one gave me an answer. Party chat, whoopdie doo vita and PS4 have it now, what else?

but PS3 didn't, and that's really the crux of the argument.  You may have had to play 60 a year for XBL, but dammit it had that one feature that the PSN didn't! 

Now, I don't know what the claim is.  I think it's something up the alley of, "When you get a gold account, you can use netflix and hulu and sports and TV and play online and..." etc.  Whereas, on PS4, you don't get all of that stuff.  I mean, you don't have to pay for it, but still.  

Now, it's no contest.  PSN+ is 50 bucks a year vs XBLG costing 60 bucks a year.  PSN+ works on PS3, PSV, and PS4, whereas XBL Gold works on 360 and Xbone.  PSN+ gives you tonnes of discounts and free game 'rentals' that last as long as your PSN+ subscription lasts, whereas XBL Gold gives you games forever...but they're crummy, old games.  PSN+ gives you access to online storage and bonus features such as auto-installing, and XBL Gold...does not.  Both offer online play and both offer cross-game chat.  Both are comparable in online speeds and reliability so far.  

So PSN+ has more features, better features, is across more systems, and is cheaper.  IT's really no contest. 

THAT is why he hasn't answered, because if he claimed the contrary, he'd be wrong. 

Here is my comparison:

Hardware:
PS4 is slimmer, sleeker, sexier, thinner, lighter, with power brick integrated
XB1 is clunky, bulky, heavy, with an external power brick

Controller:
Both controllers are great, one may be better than the other with respect to personal preference
But ps4 takes the edge due to integrated rechargeable battery, integrated speaker & motion, and touchpad as well as the share button

Games
XB1 has a better launch line up, but the upcoming games and history definitely gives the edge to PS4. For now, it's a slight edge but given that it's almost certain that PS4 will be a much better hit than PS3, just wait this gap to increase a lot more in PS4's direction.

Graphics performance
PS4 is theoretically at least 40% faster though this can be as much as 2x. The performance gap in reality may change from zero in some third party games to as much as 2.25x; either way PS4 is well ahead.

General performance
So far, PS4 is far better; much faster installation times, faster Browser performance, faster UI, instant sharing, longer video recordings etc. There is not one area where PS4 doesn't exhibit higher performance.

Media Capabilities & Multi-tasking
Xbox is potentially better, but the execution is very problematic now. PS4 does everything promised and very fast at it, such as limited multi-tasking, smooth and fast game installs, responsive UI etc... XB1 promises a lot more, but the execution and reliability are poor. Multi-tasking is superior but having more than 2 or 3 apps open is barely a niche. Snap mode sounds promising but execution is horrible. Kinect might be appealing but all it is good for so far is the voice commands, which doesn't really need anything but speaker which PS4 has integrated in its controller! Plus most of this functionality can be enabled by PSeye camera and/or some software updates. In short PS4 does less, but does it much better than XB1.

This is correct if you are subscribed to online services. Otherwise, PS4 is outright better, while XB1 just cripples pretty much everything but single player gaming.

Internet capabilities
PSN is cheaper than XBL, has more bonus materials, and so far proved to be faster and more reliable. We'll see how it will turn out.

Pricing
PS4 is better, period.

In short, my long run prediction:
PS4 will give a better hardware with better gaming and general performance and a more diverse, more balanced and much larger gaming library at a lower cost than XB1. The execution will be better although it will be a less capable machine than XB1, where it matters much less. It will do slightly less, but it will do it all much better.

It was always paid for, therefore invoking a psychosomatic reaction and smug sense of self-satisfaction!  

I wish I was joking, but that seems to be the deal.  

Objectively?  Uh, XBL had cross game chat last generation, and the downloads were a bit faster and more stable. For actual online play, no difference whatsoever, I found.  and I had XBL Gold for three years before giving up, admitting it was a ripoff. 

Well PSN already crashing at launch is indicative that it is not as good as XBL.

PSN is not even in the same ballpark as XBL. PSN has already been brought to its knees once at launch and will probably crash again next week when it launches in the rest of the world. XBL however ran smooth as butter launch night and beyond. It literally took me 2 minutes to dowload a 500mb update at midnight launch day.

One incident is not indicative of the full, long term prospects of something like that.  And even the best servers (Steam) Crash from time to time.  You're just grasping at straws, now. 

Let me open up my arguments why the glorious days of Halo over:

* The bulk of the Halo sales are due to the "network effects". People do party and buy the game their friends own. MS reaped this effect pretty nicely, feeding back and forth with the system sales. So halo was a flagship game, just like the Naughty Dog and Insomniac Games. But then Bungie left the Halo franchise... Let's now take a look at the Halo sales figures:

Now, when you look at the trend from the original Xbox times to the X360, you see a clear DECREASE in attach rate. The ratio above is a rough attach rate estimate, although the Halo sales numbers include the non-US sales as well (but most sales are from US).

Halo sold a lot, not necessarily because it was a system seller, but because it was a hardcore muliplayer game that most people could take for granted. This is because MS was able to reap the head start, halo brand name from the original Xbox, and network effects.

Now giventhe decreasing trend, lower sales ratio, lower overall XB1 sales, lower market share against PS4, and the fact that It's not Bungie's game anymore, its glorious days are certainly over. SEE THE MATH. See that Halo on X360 barely sold on par with original Halo, which was released on a much less popular console. See the sales were down hill.

------------

Kinect IS a fad. What games can you tell me about it? Tell me why Wii is not popular anymore. Tell me why PS move was never popular to begin with. Tell me about the recent kinect sales on X360... It was popular, but it wore out. Also it never was as popular outside US, now with the advantage loss even in US, kinect will be even less popular.

-----------

Now you're contradicting yourself... If Kinect was SO POPULAR and NOT A FAD, then why did nobody use it in the past, with a few exceptions? And if Kinect will be popular in the future, why is there hardly any title using it now or announced? Third parties have simply have no incentive to use it, save a few highly specialized games or software. This will be the case only if Kinect can prove to be popular with some audience, but it will always be either niche or casual, who are unreliable with their "core enough" loyalties (just like the Wii audience stopped playing games or buying Wiis once they were tired of the fad).