I don't know, while the article is emotionally effective for making things sound like Sony's dire beginning of the gen all over again, there are some pretty absurd assumptions and contradictions that probably wouldn't stand up in the average podcast discussion.
"Sony, the gigantonormous hardware company, just got punked by Nintendo, the short-sighted game company."
...The same short-sighted game company that brought motion control hardware to market which both of it's competitors are only now answering 4 years later?
"the PSP blew out the DS in terms of specs, not software. Raw hardware power."
...It also lacked a screen, a stylus, a mic, and game media that doesn't look suspiciously like a minidisk.
I mean, really? Sony is supposed to be leading Nintendo in handheld technology after the PSP?
"But wait! PlayStation 3 does 3D! The Xbox 360 does it, but Microsoft has kept it basically a secret"
But wait, the Eye Toy does gaming without a controller, but Sony has kept it basically a secret! 
And then there's the central assumption that Sony should be judged mainly on their hardware, not on their software. What's that mantra again? It's all about the games? Get any group of gamers together and ask them what makes a great console, and they're not going to tell you it's the hardware specs.
And, even if we just follow the conceit of the article, that we should always expect Sony to win with hardware and Microsoft to win with software, which of those two won for software at E3? Was Kinect's launch lineup stronger than Move's? Even with all the articles about the bugginess of it at this point? And what about the other games?
Suddenly trying to make the hardware conparison central to a company's success seems rather out of touch with what gaming is, and has always been. Don't you guys think so?
