Also, they stated that Project Scorpio would be a premium console. I would expect a $599.00 price.

The specs they gave was basically a AMD Polaris 10, which are affordable PC cards at sub $350 this year. 

I'm thinking this is likely $399.99 by next fall.

This is basically the "MS Apology Console" where they are doing everything they should've done with the XBox One, so I doubt they will make the price mistake again. 

Wishful thinking. Go talk to a developer who actually has low-level programmed on the PS4/X1. Get some insight and don't pretend there is some "magical switch". There isn't. There is a reason why some games run well and other games do not, particularly on the X1.

Remember that's the retail for the card.  While graphics cards are sold at a profit, game consoles are generally sold at cost, if not a loss.  So Microsoft will be paying wholesale and passing it on to consumers that way.  As for "retailer profit margin", I used to work in the games industry and there's little to no profit margin on the game consoles themselves.  That's been the way since Nintendo pioneered the "razor, razorblade" model starting in the mid-80s.  The consoles are sold by the manufacturer and the store nearly at cost, with everyone up and down the line hoping to sell games and accessories to make up for foregone profit on the console.  If you adjust the pre-NES game consoles for inflation you'll discover they were amazingly expensive, because those old consoles *were* sold at a mark-up by the manufacturer, and then by the store who marked it up further.  Last I checked, a Mattel Intellivision (circa 1980) would cost over $1200 at launch in today's dollars!  It's probably more than that now.

Be suspicious of console system tear-downs too, as they are only guessing at what console manufacturers actually pay for the components.

The PC have a half-made Optimization where the user need to adjust every setting if the machine isn't able to run  the game in a good condition. If Microsoft make this avaliable for the console market, then we will have a 2013 again or even worse.

   Your definition of "abandoned" doesn't match mine.  Microsoft stopped manufacturing the OG Xbox after 4 years, you're right about that.  But that's not the same as abandoned.  They continued to support the original Xbox for many years.  The original Xbox came out in 2001, Xbox Live launched in 2002, and support for Xbox Live on the original Xbox continued all the way until March 2010.  So the OG Xbox had about 8.5 years of official support from Microsoft.  I also submit to you that the original Xbox also had its share of multimedia focus, and was broadly discussed in industry circles as being Microsoft's firth thrust into a set-top-box for the living room.  CDs, DVDs, an MP3 jukebox, and more.  I think they modified their multimedia ambitions the the Xbox One launch due to public reaction, but didn't change them (look at how they're touting the UHD, 4K Netflix, etc., capability of the Xbox One S).

   In contrast, Sony ends support for online games at a whim.  GT5 launched in November 2010, but support for its online modes ended in early 2014, a mere 3.5 years later.  GT6 had just come out, so it seems to me like an attempt to actually force consumers to buy the new version if they wanted to play online.  Not cool Sony, not cool.

   For comparison's sake, launch titles on the Xbox 360 from its late 2005 launch still work online and off.  All Xbox 360 games based on standard Xbox Live matchmaking continue to work (both first party and third-party) 10.5 years and counting.  While there's no end in sight for Xbox 360 online matchmaking support (for games that didn't do their own servers, which was the overwhelming majority of them), support for the online modes of a great many PS3 games ended long ago.  Microsoft is working hard to make Xbox 360 games run on the Xbox One, as Sony tries hard to pretend the PS3 never happened by dropping support.

   And don't even get me started on the many features Sony removed throughout the PS3's life, some of which were strictly software in nature.

   If you cherry pick examples you can make either side seem bad.  But I think it could be strongly argued that Sony is the more anti-consumer of the two, by pointing to the unnecessary cessation of support for PS3 online games in its heyday.

To be honest, I don't care much about gaming online. I disliked MS for pushing online so hard. However, I can see that it matters to you and others. Point taken. 

But, regarding the original Xbox, I remember reading that MS forced 3rd parties to switch from it to 360 development immediately.  I don't feel that's fair. The original owners could still have gotten more money's worth.

I do realize that Sony is not without blame. Like sending out the Vita to basically fail, and no UMD transfer program as they said they would implement. Also, the taking away of features for PS3, as you said. I feel that MS has done more wrong though. 

I don't see what's so had about understanding this. Consoles have grown up. These are not kids toys anymore. Consoles are now the center of the digital home, and thanks to Kaz Taking over at Sony they are starting to be treated like respectable electronic devices. Due to that, Microsoft is following Sony down the same path, and in the end it actually plays out quite well for them.

Basically oing forward, Consoles will be like every other product on the market. It is your choice as a consumer how high level of experience you want. Just like you can buy a Junior Frosty, a Small Frosty, a Medium Frosty, or a Large Frosty. Or as another example you can get a Viper GT, a GTS, or an ACR. In every other field inside and outside of electronics consumers have options for basic to premium. Now we finally will have that luxury as gamers.

So people that go buy $300 55in 1080p TV's and cheap sound bars can get the base line PS4 or XBO. People with $6500 4K TV's and $1500 A/V Recievers now have the option of a premium $600 or $1000 console that can actually take advantage of this hardware.

As someone that is always at th forefront of TV and Audio tech, I love the idea that I can buy a device to take advantage of it.

Under these circumstances, it will work. Think of the Scorpio as a very expensive PC, then next gen rolls around and the Scorpio can still keep up with it, next gen rolls and it still doesn't do as much as flinch. That's the sort of thinking. Then when the engine shows it's wearing out, you create the same variant with modular upgrades. In fact, odds are the Scorpio will have special "processor bays", "GPU bays" and "memory bays". 

Doom and gloom not needed. 

If what they mentioned earlier holds for the more powerful Scorpio, you'll use one this generation and again the next one since it will either keep up anyways and if it can't, then it won't have any problems with you stuffing more memory into it. 

It won't have the stigma of the current model, so no flop will take place here...