Interesting read. Seems sensible to me, as I read him to be saying:
PS3 has more raw power however for most current gen game engines due to GPU and easier to use SDK in 360 they are more or less equal in terms of results - this seems true based on most current titles available
PS3, if coded for properly (something that's been highlighted multiple times) could be pushed further but that this would require very specific coding, something that many developers will simply avoid if they can get a decent game out that runs on both platforms equally. Hence it's with exclusives that PS3 will have to show this potential.
MS did indeed ignore sensible levels of reliability and behave in a manner detrimental to the consumer in their desire to get to market first and fast with the most power they could. Again, I thought this was well accepted now. Some don't care as they fix your console anyway, some think the extra $$$ it cost them in extended warranty was enough, some like me think they should have been punished a bit more, but whatever it's done now and they're moving past it.
PS3 is probably a better all round processing unit, and if like me you want to use it for a lot of media, BR, etc. that's great, but in general it doesn't make much difference for games (at least most built on current gen engines) while the 360 was designed very much for games only. The ability to handle media is there, and is decent, but is only to the level allowed within the design of the unit and its coding interface to support games primarily. Again, this fits with early Sony positioning. Sony made the PS3 to be more than just games, and that might not have been a wise choice (even if it suits a minority like me) in the long run.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
