They should try to make it something what people want to buy and not try to be too focus on competing.

When you focus too much on competing, you end up making your console into something expensive trying to 1upping others.

whether you like Nintendo's first party games better is irrelevent, the market greatly prefers Nintendo's first party games.  Could post numbers but everyone knows what it's gonna look like.  Sony has several franchises that sell a couple million a piece, Nintendo has many that sell 10 million .  That's why they're not in the same league. 

Like johnsobas said, opinion is irrelevant to this discussion. It doesn't matter what you or I think of Nintendo's / Sony's games, it's what the market thinks, and they overwhelmingly favor Nintendo. They completely dominate the best selling games of all time charts, that's inarguable. I know we're all videogame critics on these forums, but that has little to do with sales.

No, my argument wouldn't conclude Nintendo leading the market every gen - the N64 got virtually no third party support, nor did the GC get much, and they arrived 1-2 years late to the scene. In the case of the N64, their third party relations made it essentially Nintendo vs the rest of the world (which they have learned from, see the Wii), and with the GC they didn't offer much compelling software. The 3DS has developers on board, and since Nintendo seems to be gunning for (AAA) 3rd party support this round, it's likely their home console successor will get lots as well.

Also, they did come up with killer IP's this gen. It wasn't just motion controls, their whole strategy changed. Notice how we're getting a flood of 2D platformers now, when we never did on the N64 / GC? What about Wii Fit? Obviously the touch screen / motion control gives them more room to create experiences most gamers can appreciate, but tacking motion control onto GC games (or PS2, PS3, Xbox games for that matter) would not have worked at all.

All I wanted to say is this: if all things remain the same, Nintendo will come out on top, not Sony (which many seem to insinuate). The ball is in Sony's court - they're the ones pressured to change the status quo. They probably won't have the luxury of having billions of dollars to burn, or third parties overwhelmingly favoring them (compared to Nintendo) next gen, so it's not going to be easy.

If the PSP 4000 is to the 3000 what the 3000 was to the 2000 then my pick is that Sony is going to drop to fourth place in handheld gaming. I.E. 1. Nintendo 2. Apple. 3. Google. 4. Sony. if they do not get their act together.

They did okay, but pretty clearly undershot what they intended.  In 2004 the PS brand was impenetrable, Sony wheeled out this sleek, huge screened PS2-level handheld that basically everyone thought was going to take over, with AAA 3rd party games galore, and decimate Nintendo similar to how Sony upended the console market a decade earlier.  PSP was supposed to be "The Walkman of the 21st Century" and bring portables out of "The Handheld Ghetto".  Not just victory, but dominance was assured, especially given Nintendo's response seemed to be some ugly dual screen N64-ish oddity, who's killer apps consisted of puppy sims and edutainment.

To say Sony did well for their first time feels a bit tinged with revisionism.  This was an impossibly impressive handheld from the biggest brand in videogames with almost universal industry support.  No one else has ever had a "first attempt" with so much potential, Nintendo included.  I wouldn't say PSP was a total failure or anything, but it's not exactly a rousing success either.  It has impressive hardware sales but pathetic software sales.  It's managed more marketshare than any non-Nintendo handheld previously, yet Nintendo now sits in stronger position that they ever have as well.  It's these sorts of simultaneous wins/losses that make it feel like PSP's treaded water more than sink or swim, so to speak.

Really though, I think PSP's greatest sin is that it's badly positioned itself for a successor.  The blade/razor model doesn't work well with handhelds, and neither do premium pricepoints, which sort of limits a generational leap over PSP1.  Moving sideways into the phone market would just bring them into arguably greater competition and a likely losing battle with Apple.  And worst of all, plenty of 3rd parties have gotten burned badly on the platform, meaning PSP2's road to getting support is going to be dramatically more difficult than the first time around.  The platform's already winding down too, with no successor in sight, and looks to end with a whimper rather than a bang.  Like you say anything can happen, but considering Nintendo just unveiled their own almost impossibly impressive handheld, with even more AAA 3rd party support upfront than anyone has had since PS2, it's understandable when people say "Sony are screwed".  Because from most vantage points, they are.  3DS basically marries the best from DS with the best from PSP, and does it in 3D, there's just not too many options left on the table for Sony here...

dito. he was right. we may serve under different flags, but we all serve gaming

just bring on the PSP2 already....

they already development of PSP2 or similar device, probably powered by powerVR series 6 chip, series4-5 right now power the iphone and nokia n900 n8 devices

1. Why is Sony "so screwed"?

2. What features does the PSP-4000 have, that you know it will "screw" Sony?

This could benefit in Sony's favor by quite a bit.

The 3DS is expected to be at a high price, and if Sony is only coming out with a PSP 4000 then there is more then likely going to be little change. So the price should be the same or cheaper. 

If history repeats itself, then the cheapest console usually wins.