PS3 will sell around 3million units in others alone in december 2008

[MikeB]

> The PS3 wasn't designed to do PS2 numbers right out of the gate, it was
> designed for a long term future (IMO this is obvious considering costly hardware
> specs).

Examples:

- Two times 128 MB of flash memory, much of which still unused. It would have been cheaper to go with 1 smaller chip. For example the 360 only has 16 MB firmware flash memory.
- Blu-Ray drive, if the PS3 is to be an interesting HD console 5 years from now this is crucial. More space for lots of good quality textures, top audio and high definition movie compatibility. Microsoft went with much cheaper old technology.
- Cell processor combined with expensive low latency main RAM, Sony looked well where the market is heading. Multi-CPU-like design is the way to go, it co-designed the Cell processor to allow for best performance, performance efficiency on an as power efficient and small chip as possible. Microsoft went for a simpler chip design with just 3 cores with shared L2 cache between all cores (vs 8 CPUs each with dedicated high speed memory and enormous onchip bandwidth). IBM is clearly more enthusiastic with regard to Cell technology for good reasons.
- Default (easily upgradeable from many different manufacturers) harddrive and high speed Gigabit ethernet, crucial for extensive online functionality.
- Important standards integrated like BlueTooth, Wi-Fi and HDMI 1.3.

The PS3 wasn't designed cheaply or to be compromised for long term potential in any way.