Sorry that part wasn't specifically directed to you, but the people who do instead seem to be getting the jimmies rustled.

Really, though, its a rather genious hybridization of a home console and a smartphone.

The real key is the distribution platform - the Big 3 cannot compete with it, because they can't return to the Atari-era of game creation, which had no quality controls. It'd be disasterous for them. However, a console like this can take the risk, because the digital retail space has no limits to inventory, so no crash is fully possible (along with user voting to determine which products work well).

Throw in the fact that its only marginally more expensive than a Roku box or other TV-streaming devices, and it makes for a very good price proposition.

Certainly a lot of jimmies being rustled, personally i think it was a brilliant marketing scheme and everyone is just jelly as all hell up in this bitch.

FYI, they had an official post in the comments section about the 80k production run.

They said that they're confident they can produce that many before it hits stores. They aren't sure if they can do anything above that, though. I'd imagine that they have a few days to figure that out before they'd have a need to add more (even then, it'd probably make sense to just make it a cool 100k).

I'm surprised they haven't added any numbers to the developer consoles - those sold out rather quickly.

1) I was not referring to now but to late 2013 based on the very fast increase in mobile hardware technology. By the time PS4/neXtBox launch there will be phone/tablets that are close enough to them to run scaled down games. With a year to 18mos of their launch they will be matched by these same devices. Next year we'll see games that are equal in nearly all ways to vitaPs360 and those games will continue to launch after next-gen is fully out there. All it takes is a few Android/GoogleTV/iOS set-top boxes with dedicated controls to make 3rd parties throw games at them. The massive interest in this device proves to publishers there is interest.

2) Networks get better every day as does the compression technology OnLive and others use. There's a reason Sony just bought Gaikai. Exclusives have nothing to do with this topic. People will buy Ms/Sony/Nintendo for their exclusives, sure, but there are a very large number of people who don't care as much as only play COD or some other set of 3rd party games. In fact, I'd wager that they are a larger set of consumers. Especially the casuals.

3)This means the whole idea "but it haz no controllerz... " is pointless. (sorry I hear it all the time) So as these set-top boxes become more prelavent as Android and iOS matures, you'll see a lot of $99 or $199 boxes for TVs that will easily equal anything in this or next-gen PLUS all the smart OS features users want. So game centric devices like this will not be as important.

p
1. That's still false. Depite the rapid movement forward, I don't think you understand how much more powerful console /PC chips are. (There's a reason they're huge.) We've seen some impressive feats done on phones, but take note -- Mobile devices do not get the allocated resources that consoles/pc get. Thus they will not be able to compete, because they need to stay at a low power output. People like to make predictions about next gen phones and what they will support, but that's only to drive support. It just simply isn't close enough yet. Definitely not even into 2013, I also doubt 2014. Preidctions estimate power increase between years will continue to gain large numbers. However, mobile processors hold 32 KB l2 cache, and 1 MB l3. Even netbooks have far superior processors to that, and that's the very MINIMUM. Now ... If in a year a smart phone was allocated to be a "gaming device." It's far more feasable as extended resources wouldn't be necessary elsewhere in the machine. Even so, it would still hold a lot of fragmentation into the market -- something that is not good for games. (This is another reason why it won't happen, such an extreme jump would leave everyone from the year prior completely uncapable of running the new applications)

To end: No, it's not happening.

2. Technology improves every day indeed. That doesn't mean, all services improve. I think you underestimate the costs to improve servers / bandwith. OnLive has certainly become large, but what you're suggesting won't happen. It assumes that as soon as technology improves, then providers switch within a decent amount of time period. This is proven false, by looking at American internet providers. For eample, TimeWarner charges people about $50 a month for a 10mbps down/ 1mbs upload -- this has been the same for over 5 years. They've recently come out with a plan for about $99, that triples or quadrouples that. That connection would be necessary to play OnLive currently, with no lag and full 720P(Assuming OnLive's servers could even output that -- which they can't.)

Do you instantly get a new connection when a better service is provided? Have you expierenced the major issues that plague OnLive? Would someone really want to pay a monthly subscription ON TOP of a large internet bill, just to afford to be able to do cloud gaming. (Not to mention on mobile devices, an even larger input delay with devices not having the same internet connection speed as desktops.)

3. I'll agree with all that, except for Gaming.

Oh but they will. Once that number is getting close to 80K they will increase the limit.

They will increase some of the higher tiers too, just you wait. It's just another business company after all, and they all love money.

1) We're not just talking about phones/tablets here. I'm talking about set-top boxes that plug-in to the wall. Well, people argued with me that Vita wouldn't be matched/beat (hardware-wise) before the end of 2012 by Android products. Guess we'll see what happens in 2013 with this one. Just look at the MS Surface tablet Pro. It has an i5 processor... in a tablet that is barely bigger than an iPad3. I also think you are over simplifying the difference between high-end phone/tablet hardware and netbooks/laptops.

2) I pay $45/mo for 20Mbps. Last year it was 12Mbps. Additionally, EU and Japan and other nations are faster/better than US at this increase. I get 16Mpbs down and 10Mbps up constantly or better... even over wifi.

3) ok.

Almost 22,000 sold so far.

1. The point still remains valid. Google doesn't want fragmentation anymore. In order for a box to compete with consoles, while running on android -- it would need a signfiicant technology gain on other devices. That doesn't bold well for the android market. By the end of 2012 the Vita still won't be matched either. It needs to be noted that the Vita is underclocked as well. It won't stay as powerful hardware wise in 2013. As in some department it is beat, (Such as memory / Ram.) However, furthermore tablets/phones/boxes still have to deal with fragmentation and other active memory. With those limitations, it won't pass.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the i5. I certainly hope you're aware that it's not a desktop i5, or even a laptop. It's a significally reduced one. Certainly it does have a lot of power, but the integrated chip is still weak.

Explain to me how I'm oversimplfying it then. Simply put I think you're expecting a jump that won't happen for at least another two years.

2. That's still not enough to play 720P via cloud streaming, and considering the next console jump + subscription fees... You're looking at a hefty price for a "android box"

Quick edit: I do want to make the note, what you're suggesting is certainly possible. Making an Android gaming device, that does have beefy system requirments that can compete with consoles. But as I mentioned previously, google doesn't like that idea because of fragmentation. It also would mean a  device that is similarly priced to an actual console, and it would mean you would need dedicated developers to that device.