By the way, poll results are hilarious.

Based on your 1st sentence, it would be fair (or unfair if your a PS fan) to use 2005-Nov 2006 weekly sales, where PS3 sold 0 every week. PS3 was supposed to launch globally in spring 2006, did you know that? Weve always counted lifetime sales. But considering it has mainland Europe and Japan, I am not surprised. But the fact that it is taking this long is a Xbox victory in itself.

Do you live in Spain, Japan, France? Because most posters here are from NA and UK....Xbox turf. I am starting to find it hilarious that PS fans who live in 360 turf pretend they give a damn about what the Spanish or Japanese gamers like when they dont live there. This paragraph is just a mini rant, but I digress.

Software sold is irrelevant because PS3 sold less lol. Just saying cant say something is more successful when clearly gamers bought a ton more games on the rival console.

Why not compare this to last gen? You come into a new round with the rep you had from the last one. Xbox rose to the occasion and PS, no matter how you slice it, took a step back for the brand. The relevancy of this is different to everybody, but it does mean soemthing when comparing the stability of each brand.

That is very skin deep......I could say 360 had RROD, and doesnt have mainland Europe and Japan to bail it out. Nevermind PS2 brand power, which I think to this day, was PS3s biggest asset.

The fact that it is taking this long is a loss in itself.

The origional point of this RROD quote spree was about money lost. And I assure you, Sony lost more money on PS3 merely existing then MS lost on RROD.

By all means, 360s today have nowehere near that kind of failure rate. Arguing about failure rates from older 360 models makes no sense.

So I'm guessing you have no idea how information analysis works do you? One source of evidence =/= trump another if both are valid, and both are valid. If you read your source, which you clearly didn't, they admit that the failure rate is propably more around ~35%, and again that's not including the fact that it is only for 2 years, not 3 which the MS warranty covers. 

If you have no idea how stat analysis works, please don't talk about it as if you do because saying "50% LOL" just makes you sound incredibly ignorant. 

Unless you can prove it that is just a wild guess worth nothing. The xbox looked to have at least 3 years of RROD issues, and with a failure rate between 25-50%, that will have cost them a lot of money and gained them nothing in return. At least Sony can spin a profit on the likes of bluray. 

Strawman argument. If you want to come up with issues with my source of evidence, feel free to do so, but I know both are not flawless hence why both have to be considered. 
My true colours is that I've studied this kind of thing at uni. The only "true colours" shown here are how many people are happy to argue about a topic they are woefully uneducated in. Would you argue quantum physics with a physicist? No. So why argue buisness analytics when you have zero education on stat analysis?

You aren't making any sense. Week on week, you don't go "hurr hurr they weren't released then" if we are trying to guage popularity of a product. Sheer sales, yes obviously the 360 has sold more, but what is that fact actually worth when all the factors are considered? Very little is the answer - they had a years lead so no shit. The interesting fact is with a years lead they are only ~1 million consoles ahead. 

Check the profile - UK.

Who determines the success of a car by the amount of rims sold for it? No one. So why are you talking about software?
Last gen = different market, different conditions. 

The charts exist, they have been posted by users here occasionally. If anybody reads this they can do it again. Claiming ignorance can only take you so far. MS paid 1 billion in 2007 for RROD expenses and 360 started profiting in 2008. PS3 lost around 4 billion from 2006 until 2010 when it finally started to profit.

Sony profit on Bluray......you are aware they havent posted a cent of profit in 4 years (the whole company), and its effects on electronics profitability is lower then you think, otherwise net profits would be higher (they arent).

Actually the exact losses from the RROD are unknown. And you are ingoring other streams of revenue that the PS3 aided with e.g. bluray sales - Sony make the discs and own Sony Pictures don't forget. 

RIiight.....so because the mobile division loses money we should ignore revenue streams the PS3 helped to create? Wut?

Just doing what has been a gamer tradition since the invention of the internet. We count total, lifetime sales, and the gen starts when the 1st one releases. You version is pure spin to make up for Sonys mismanagement in PS3s pre launch and post launch. 360 gained popularity while PS3 was just buzz. Sorry but thats what happened.

"The interesting fact is with a years lead they are only ~1 million consoles ahead."

I can say 360 had RROD, no Europe and Japan bailing them out. Not to mention PS3 had PS2 brand power bailing it out in its early years and Xbox went from a 25 million install base to 77 million and counting. The gap now can only be described as a PS loss.

Last gen still determines the starting position and brand power of the console. Sony messed up and MS gained. Dont drag Nintendo into this, as they clearly used fickle casuals that simply didnt carry over to this gen. Keep this Xbox vs PS.

1. That's still 2 million more then PS3 (I think it's less now)

2. Doesn't matter, if both systems stopped selling now 360 would win. MS was able to release a system a year early then good for them. Why should PS3 get the benefit of the doubt? For instance do we go around saying that the GBA was the second most successful Nintendo handheld? No it's the least successful because the DS was released soon afterwards.

Sony entered this gen late, but they are also leaving late.

3. When someones 360 broke, they had a 3 year warrenty by microsoft to get a new one. I'm on my 4th X-Box, all replaced under warrenty.

PS3 didn't have as big of a fail rate, but they didn't have as long of a warrenty, so when my PS3 broke, I eventually have to get a new one.

Plus there is always the good chance those people bought the opposing console. You really can't argue that the PS3 is ahead of the 360 because of reliability because you really don't know how many people on each side rebought systems.