I don't think he lives in the US so he doesn't really understand how disastrous the reveal was in Microsoft's biggest territory.
It took years just for the average Joe to understand you didn't need to be online at all times and that you could buy/sell used games. And then all you were left with was a weaker console at a similar price, and the PS4 had already become the mainstream console in the US by that time so a lot of people just went with what their friends had.
He's not applying any context to the reveals at all, which is where his mistake is. Sony built up a giant fanbase with PSone and PS2. Playstation is a more well known worldwide brand. They can afford a fuck up like $600 and have it not kill their product, see: PS3. Even if he was right that the PS3 reveal and launch was worse than Xbone (it wasn't), that still doesn't mean it was as damaging to the brand as the Xbone reveal was to Xbox, which was the point the user he quoted was making anyway.
So explain to me how it tracked ahead of X360 for 3 years.
The market for consoles is constantly growing and you seem to have forgotten about the WiiU. With WiiU being a total flop there were only two major players in the consoles market during the start of PS4/X1 generation.
X1 never solve the main issue until they release the Xbox one S(slightly less powerful but offers feature that make it on par with PS4), there consoles was less powerful and they tried to sell it at higher price since it included a peripheral that no one wanted. X1 also never won the exclusives at launch because they ignored indies. There is no way X1 can recover in market they were never strong trying to sell an inferior product compare to Sony. Phil Spencer and his team has done an amazing job putting out all the fires and really offering value to their customers that Sony can't match or doesn't care to match. Xbox Play anywhere, Xbox game pass, backward compatibility & EA Access.
Although PS3 was slightly more powerful, the image of worse and without games have been held for more than half the gen because of the poor ports.
X1 had more high budget exclusives at launch (and yes the Indies they lost because of other mistakes we hadn't enumerated before).
Also comes to relevance that this is the first gen where the most powerful console won (or if you want to consider X1X then never the most powerful console won).
I agree with your points on the effort that MS team done (even though the most important that was having more studios took they 5 years to do a "5 min" action that is buying a lot of studios).
But bottom line we can see that there wasn't really a turnaround. From launch to about year 3 MS have been very straight forward that at first X1 was tracking ahead of X360 and then reduced that to tracking ahead in USA (and to this moment it still isn't that obscenely lower, nor did it grown to say it turned around) while EU+JP+RoW they started bad and kept bad. So how can we say they tun around on sales or success if the distance to PS4 only grow and their sales curve dropped outside of USA+UK?
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."