I think you are a bit confused about my argument.  I'm saying  Sony fans only care so much about the graphics because its been Sony's big thing since last generation.  Until then Sony consistently had the weakest console in terms of graphics.  Sony fanboys will simply say whatever Sony does like parrots so long as it doesn't deeply conflict with their beliefs.

The only thing Sony did was capitalize on Nintendo's bad business practices from back in the N64 era.  Since then they haven't really done anything to hurt their reputation or anything to bolster their reputation.  The hardcore loved the PS3, they just couldn't justify buying one until the price dropped.  

Microsoft exclusives are a lot more likely to remain exclusives than Sony exclusives.  Microsoft right now is throwing money out the window paying for them, Sony can't do that so they lose out.  Right now Sony only has its first party as guaranteed exclusives.  The rest are pretty much flying away to multiplatform status like  Metal Gear.  

Cause that's really all it's got. And $100 less.

True the differences in graphics are going to be really minor at best. Remember the Xbox was over twice as powerful as the PS2 and it didn't really matter.

Xbox one has so many other enhancing features that will make gaming and games more interesting. Then there is all the others stuff it can do, and more stuff it will be able to do in the future.

The PS4 should be a fine gaming system, but some are so worried about it 'loosing' they just can't help themselves.

Sony creates dedicated fans, just like Nintendo dedicated to a wealth of exclusives. Microsoft....I don't really understand the hype outside of Halo and Gears after a decade of being in the industry. I still buy their consoles though, just don't understand the hype.

That last paragraph brought me back. Just looking back there were so many lessons to be learned from this gen. If you throw money at developers to make games become exclusive, its still not your franchise but theirs. They decide where it goes. Microsoft proved that when you put your faith in third parties for exclusives you can lose them easily, so Sony further bolstered their first party ranks when they lost exclusivity to the likes of Tekken, Final Fantasy and Metal Gear at E3 2008. Since then you've seen a new Sony that we've never seen before wall to wall, lined with exclusives.  

Microsoft always plays the third party exclusive game. They just can't seem to nail having a fleet of first party even though they've been trying since the first gen. It was actually much worse last gen with more franchises, but eventually they all dried up when Sonys marketshare expanded and third parties wanted multiplat profits. Thanks to their purchasing of Rare at least their first party has a leg to stand on. Microsoft's most successful exclusive titles were in development before they bought them or paid for their exclusivity. Halo, Gears, Rares IP's  and Titanfall would be the last example. Its their great equalizer. Can't blame them for being dependent upon it. Obviously they have the best OS but they are the least creative company of the big three.

Much smaller and lighter device and no external power brick

You can change the HDD (faster booting and loading times, more disc space) easily and without losing your warranty

Less power consumption in standby mode (if you don't turn off your console completely, you save money)

Much faster boot times after a cold start (if you turn off your console completely after using it, you save time)

Well that just might turn out to be true but, so can the opposite - who knows. Right now, I think both are in the same boat in being consoles with almost nothing to play or show off their 'greatness'. There's only so much Killzone and Forza one man can play before he gets bored, and goes back to his PS360 - which I assume a lot of games are doing right now. So saying one is better than the other because it's faster is nonesence because RIGHT NOW, both seem equally matched. However, I think the X1 is built better, it just looks better, the UI looks better and i'm sure will get even better, even the HDMI cord and mic in the box are better, it comes with a camera,...it's just is a better value IMO, but that's just my opinion. One appears to be mainly a gaming console, while the other appears to be an entertainment console. So in that sense as well the X1 I think is a better value.

because Console gamers are all about the graphics. Until a PC gamer comes along to shut them up, and then they change their tune to "its not all about graphics, you elitist PC gamers"
(Speaking from experience as a PC gamer)

sorry but ever PC gamer I speak to fails to build me a PC for £350 that will rival a PS4....and they cant even guarantee it will run games as long as the PS4 will. Maybe youre different?

People who built their PC's when PS3 came out cant even run COD ghosts anymore because of RAM requirement, yet the PS3/360 still can.

MS made the right move in releasing the 360 ahead of the PS3, cause if they didn't, the PS3 would have been as popular as the PS2 I think. Yes the PS3 cought up EVENTUALLY, but the damage was already done. Things are on a more even plain right now, although I think there are still marginally more Sony fans out there.

To answer your question, I thought MS would have brought the X1 a year earlier, before the PS3 caught the 360, to save face and to get another jump on the new console generation. Ultimately, I didn't think the PS3 would cathe the 360, or MS wouldn't have let that happen. I guess MS took a page out of Nintendo's and Sony's book and got too confident.

This, minus the obscenities

Being more powerful and cheaper alone make it a much better piece of hw.

Having a bunch of 1st pty support nail it.

Why would someone buy the most expensive if its weaker? Only reason is the kinect, if you are into that type of thing go for it, personally I love my game with AA...

Oh and the ps4 is much better looking in the living room, no power brick, slick...