why are you quoting me, i havent posted any facts, trying to make kinect look bad. i dont think any one doubts that kinect is a better body tracker than the ps eye. also where did you get that kinect is 640x480 @ 60fps. its always been reported  320 x 240 @ 30 FPS. the bolded is a lie, move has always been able to do head tracking (it does it in this little game called GT5) and did you not reaf the OP and story at all. he said the eye can do depth through algarithems, but kinect gets it for free. also how is move based on old tech and is copying. from every major reviewer (also digital foundry and modern science) say it the most advanced and accurate motion tech. 

also

2003     2010

Because it is particularly attractive to casual crowd, I would expect to peak sales in the holiday season much closer to the Wii than other XBox product. I own a Wii and a PS3 and I have no interest in Kinect. However, it doesn't matter if its sales will or will not keep the momentum, Kinect is an undeniable  success.

Go read the latest reports on what Kinect is capable of, I'm done arguing with people who only know half the story. On PCs it has already been proven that both cameras can run at 640x480 @ 60 fps.

I own and use my Kinect on a near daily basis and have to say this article helps illustrate some of Sony's overall problems.  First off, holding a glowing ball is not "sexy," being able to perform yoga with a personal instructor in front of your tv while doing nothing other than wearing what you wear is "sexy."  The ability to fire up the xbox and say "xbox, Zune" and have it launch right into the Zune application is definitely sexy.  

I think that Sony focuses too much on the "hardcore" gamer and not enough on the actual gamers out there.  This can been seen in their interest to value things like framerate, graphics, or the amount of in-game users OVER actual functional gameplay.  Put another way, if Killzone 2 played as well as it looked, they would have their very own CoD style sales.  Anyways, I think it is just a case of the "big guy" losing sight of what made them big in the first place... innovation, great pricing, mass marketing where did you go?

I don't see how kinect is innovative or has great pricing, like Sony said they were looking at 3D cameras for awhile and just felt it would be a pseye 1.5, if Sony released Kinect not one person would call it innovative but since MS did everyone is as for the pricing for what kinect is capable of it is pricy, though MS really got the mass market appeal though that has very little to do with the actual quality or capabilities of the product or even the games that are on it, if it wasn't advertised and hyped it wouldn't have even sold 1 mil

Sounds like Sony just didn't have the R&D talent to make it work or they weren't ambitious enough.  If it weren't innovative, how do you explain the results of googling "kinect hacks" vs "ps3 move hacks"?

It's true, quoting myself from a couple of months before Kinect launched:

"The IMO top three biggest problems with Kinect is:

1) A very noticeable response lag. This kills the potential of fast paced accurate gaming. In part this is due to the too slow camera and in part due to the additional processing going on taking too much time.

2) No analog stick/buttons or triggers. It can't recognize seperate fingers, so even pretending you are pulling an imaginary trigger on an imaginary gun won't work (which IMO would be ackward anyway, holding nothing and pretending). Also look at the Starwars game under development, you can't rotate your view nor manually walk this while lightsaber slashes display notieable lag...

3) The camera is IMO far too big and ugly and pretty expensive for what you get.

Technical specifications Playstation Eye vs Kinect cameras:

Kinect in addition to normal camera also includes an infrared camera, which could allow it to do better in different light situations, but likely not in the case of Playstation Eye Playstation Move cases for most games.

Horizontal field of view:

Kinect: 57 degrees
Playstation Eye: 75 degrees

Vertical field of view:

Kinect: 43 degrees
Playstation Eye: 56 degrees

With 16 bit color depth:

Kinect: 320 x 240 @ 30 FPS
Playstation Eye: 320 x 240 @ 120 FPS

With 32 bit color depth:

Kinect: - (not supported)
Playstation Eye: 640 x 480 @ 60 FPS

Audio:

Kinect: 16 bit audio @ 16 kHz
Playstation Eye: 16 bit audio @ 48 kHz"

I tried to warn people, but many were just too hyped (like for the fake Milo demo). I find Kinect to be pretty destructive for hardcore gaming on the XBox. Half of the XBox game shelf space here is now dedicated to predominantly crappy Kinect-only games.

I also mentioned the additional resource requirement compared to Move and I find his comments interesting that he just like me thinks Kinect is mostly usefull for dancing/exercises games/programs, that's exactly what I once wrote. IMO don't expect much hardcore game support for Kinect, unlike for Playstation Move.

Kinect sucess is due to marketing and consumer perception almost exclusively, after the holidays it had a huge drop in sales, and I think it will continue dropping the longer it is out

Interesting.  Can you point me to all the products that had a jump in sales after the holiday shopping season was over?

Also, can you give me the PS3 sales figures in Jan compared to Dec?

Thanks.