S.T.A.G.E. - A console's life isn't ended the moment its successor is launched. MS can support the 360 long after releasing the next system. A new system's launch only hastens the previous console's death. Sony still supports the PS2, MS doesn't continue to support the XBox. If you need to, take some time to meditate on those two facts before continuing to make such comments.

It was the NES I believe that was sold for almost 20 years, but that happened because there was a demand for it.

Saying you're gonna support a product for 10 years from the get go, without even knowing what the consumer veredict will be is really pretentious.

And here I was thinking Xbox360 used IBM processors, ATI graphics unit, and other 3rd party companies for other components too.

Every day is a school day, I guess.

THe PS2 will last for about 12years atleast. Same goes for the wii. The 360 can last for 8years min. The ps3 lasting ten years isnt special

First of all I'd assume Sony is a lot better at cutting hardware costs quickly, because they've been in the hardware buisiness for a long, long time (is that not logical?).  Its also likely the cost between making a blu-ray drive and a dvd drive will narrow to be very little in the next few years (like DVD did in comparison to CD).

Second of all: ps3 at $200 and xbox 360 at $100-$120????? Now no one here actually knows what it will be like, you're stating a really, really big 'what if'.  Microsoft may seem to have a very large price advantage right now, but that may change very soon.  And assuming MS is selling at a loss for the arcade right now(who knows if they are), can they really sustain a loss when selling to the more casual market ($100-$120 is really casual) - who are less likely to buy as many games?

This whole 10 year plan thing has really been taken for a ride. The developer of the two most successful consoles ever believed they were releasing the next most successful console ever. Did you expect them to say that the PS3 wouldn't last as long as the PS2?

things are starting to look rosy for the ps3? come on...

Unlikely.

Sony's definition of the 10 year plan was the same as what they did with the PS2, have it sell as their premier platform for at least 6 years, in which they establish themselves as the dominant force in the industry as well as securing nearly all the best games on their platform to ensure it continues to sell well into the net profit region for years to come.

For the PS3, the PS3 will be the premier platform for longer than 6 years, in which they claw back alot of lost ground from Nintendo and Microsoft, in turn getting some of the best games on their platform in order to eventual hit the net profit region.

Similar, except that with the PS2, it's just money making now, but with the PS3, it's producing and selling until the bleeding stops. I'm not complaining though, I own a PS3!

So basically, it's kind of lucky they announced the 10 year plan, but don't think of it as a huge thing, seeing as how the PS2 will enter it's 10th year next year. It's two very different philosophy's for the same sentence.

Firstly: The Xbox 360 doesn't need a HDD or can get away with a very small one. Theres a bunch of money saved right there.

Secondly: Sony is paying more for licensing of technology, the GPU, CPU and Blu Ray playback costs them more money than Microsoft pays. Furthermore they use XD ram whilst the 360 uses GDDR3 which is much more common and based of a fairly common standard (DDR2)

Thirdly: Microsoft can combine the Xenon + Xenos and actually have a roadmap to do just that. Sony has a much trickier job as they don't own the I.P for the RSX or Cell.

Lastly: When it comes down to it, once the next generation is out the PS3 is going to look pretty vulnerable if next gen hardware with full BC is only $50-100 more expensive.

+1