You realize the system is 6 months or more off and you're criticizing features we're just now getting the a tidbit of how they work and we don't have a full understanding of all the features yet, right?

The PS3 uses considerably less power while in stand-by mode with remote start (gives the PS3 a wireless router like mode so that you can connect your PSP directly or via the internet) and next to none with just regular stand by mode (Just the start button and the controller can turn it on). They got it right with the last system. What makes you think they'll be working backwards?

I wish there was a video. The text was informative but a video would have really painted the picture. Now, when I do see the inevitable video, the surprise is blown.

Aside from this, the whole thing sounds awesome. I'm looking forward to trying these features out.

I sold my 3DS. No games for me and wasn't impressed enough with the graphics capabilities. I will likely buy my first Sony handheld ever if Sony does this right, keeps it at that $249 price point, and has good FPS support (with potential for crossplatform play with PS3 games?)

I saw the post about the PSP vs 3DS battery life. Now, I personally don't have a problem with my PSP or my 3DS's battery life. When I'm at work, I have a lot of time (sometimes, a full twelve hours) to play with my portables and my phone. My phone sucks a battery dry in no time if I'm pushing it hard (games, wi-fi, brightness, etc). My portables have treated me well by comparison.

My PSP 3000 is a 2009 model. I haven't clicked the link but I REFUSE to believe that it has a better battery life (obviously, my PSP's battery isn't what it was in 2009). This is off topic, of course. If I'm very bored (translation: I'll never do it!) I'll try out the 3DS running a game with the brightness and Wi-Fi on max settings and try the same console on minimum brightness, no wi-fi, and battery saver mode. I'll do the same with the PSP. I am positive that the 3DS out-performs the PSP when both use max power AND minimum power. And, I'm willing to bet my left nut (still my favorite ball!) that the 3DS will handily outperform the Vita (which I personally can't wait to purchase).

In the meantime, I'm stuck at work and it would take too long for me to make a thread on my phone (Opera Browser won't support it and Explorer is too slow when I'm at work). Will somebody make a thread asking 3DS owners about the battery life of their console? That way, I can quit derailing this thread.

Ah I see the problem... you read my post thinking i'm trying to critisize.

I'm trying to reach a conclusion based on 2 facts: the device is built to be powerfull and Near doesn't use wifi.

PS3 is a non issue as it's standby mode does not have it communicate with every PS3 in proximity. There is a big difference between pinging a server to know if there's an update and download it and with scanning the wireless frequency to see if there is a device in range, then transfer a whole variety of data depending on which software they have installed. However, i'm not saying they can't have a 3DS like spotpass, what I said is that the description of Near makes it seem as there is no connection involved (until you're back home and it synchs with servers) and thus i hypothesized that this is due to battery life and the vita's architecture not being designed for low power states.

My critic is that I believe this system will have a hard time being sustain by the users (too much involvement in the process).

I was confirmed ages ago that Near can be used with both Wifi and 3G. For obvious reasons it's just better with 3G.

When I say Wifi, I mean local connection between consoles. 3G is definitely not a local connection. I'm not disputing what you say though.

The article of the op appears to me as if Near only connect to servers and not other PSVitas. Did I read this wrong?

"Imagine user A visits locations one to ten through that day, and they get home and sync with the server and it uploads to the Near server your ten locations that you've been to.

"User B comes along, does the same thing, but at some point in User B's day they passed User A's location five, which means they're now able to collect gifts that that user's dropped. That comes into the Near application and then in-game they pick up those gifts."

Underlined: If it was strictly internet based and NOT console to console local connections, there would be no need to sync the locations you've been with a server after getting home. Since you would be connected already you would have synced then and there. It's clearly a feature that can be used offline.

Italic: Clearly refering to the two systems being in proximity.

EDITED

I base my interpretation on the same sentences as you and we have the opposit meaning :-p

underline... if it was console to console you would not need to have a server in the middle.

The italic means that if I go to the empire state building at 2PM and then you go there at 4PM, you'll have passed through my location and thus will be able to collect the gift that I dropped. There is no connection or proximity between the PSVitas.

 .... I think that if we argue on this it'll be a pointless back and forth as it's interpretation of the same sentences... :-/

Ah, I see what you mean, now. Makes sense except one thing. What would you be connecting to at the various locations if it wasn't other PS Vita's? Internet hotspots? If so then there would be no need to sync the 10 locations when you get home because you would have synced then and there at the hotspot.