Design - I agree that 360 looks cooler, but 360 should have lots a couple more points for still having the power brick. PS3 shouldn't have lots by THAT much just for having a boring matte finish.
Features - Agreed, but they failed to mention there's a 320GB PS3 out as well as just 160GB.
Online - 360 deserves to win this category no doubt, but PS3 should have been a bit higher than a 3.3, more like a 3.7 or 3.8, all its really missing is cross game chat and a few other small things. Also I'm pretty sure you don't need a disk for netflix anymore on PS3. I would mention its free but that's more to do with the value section.
Games - I don't really get how this was a tie. 360 has some exclusives as well as slightly better versions of multiplat games (not so much anymore) but PS3 rocks them in exclusives. I would have given PS3 a 4.5 and 360 the 4 it got.
Graphics - No argument here, a slight edge to PS3 sounds about right.
Value - No argument here, but I think it should have been a bit more in PS3's favour since you get free online compared to $60 per year. By not having to pay that $60 for online you could buy an extra game each year.
Overall not too bad a comparison, but maybe a bit 360 biased (even though the PS3 won by a hair). But the truth is who gives a shit about a slight graphical edge or design or whatever. The three that really matter for gamers are games, online service and value; and games comes down to personal preference. PS3 and 360 both have great graphics, lots of features and good enough designs so those are really irrelevant unless your a fanboy trying to prove your console is better.
