Kinect plus the inbox tv tuner?

Sony is not taking loss with this cheaper PS4 config... if there is any loss is really low.

I didn't know about the different APU, thought that it was just that Microsoft was using an inferior version of the same base generation APU, like say a 7950 vs a 7970 graphics card.

Do you have a link as quite interested to read up on that, is it a difference size manufacturing process or something as a less powerful APU should surely be smaller if smae manufacturing process?

(Sorry I'm not that clued up these days on the technical stuff with the next gen consoles).

only kinect, I am pretty sure the Eye toy was supposed to be bundled with the ps4 and take out at the last minute to lower the realease price it would be a good move.

No. I think Sony is ether making a small profit or just losing a couple of dollars. 

I'd forgotten about Kinect, but Major Nelson has recently openly stated that there is no tuner in the Xbox One and it is simply depending on it's HDMI in for TV duties from a set top box.

Not sure how that's going to work personally because HDMI is quite limited in terms of sending signals other than basic "on/off/change channel", really don't know how the Xbox One will even know what channel it's on let alone the super advanced stuff shown in the Xbox One reveal in terms of the EPG/TV Guide and so forth.

Also noted that there certainly weren't any coaxial inputs on the backplate of the Xbox One for a dish feed to be used as an input.

You people are saying that a piece of hardware has a fixed cost for both companies and that should determine what the final cost should be. This is wrong...

- We don't know what kind of cost the software development had for both consoles
- Microsoft is making their cloud services available to everyone for FREE. This costs money
- all the cable features that come with Xbox one probably cost more

And then you have things like bundled kinect, possibly a pack in game...who knows.

Kinect, weak Yen, and I'd also add that the PS4 just may be the more efficient console. Every XBox has been pretty big, with an external power brick, and they've definitely had their battles with overheating. Sony is an electronics company first and foremost, so I think Sony just has the upper hand when it comes to engineering the hardware. Most PlayStation iterations are smaller, quieter, and cooler than their XBox counterparts with internal power supplies. I'd have to imagine this also helps the bottom line due to less materials being needed. With the yield problems XBox One is rumored to be having, they've made another giant console with a ton of cooling (it seems).

It's mostly the bundling of Kinect though.

I don't think it has a tuner.  I thought it was just HDMI passthrough, essentially passing the feed from your cable box to your XBox One, though I could be wrong.

The GPU is weaked and cheaper into the Xbone APU but everything else is expensive...

Xbone APU (5 billions transistors, ~450mm²)
+ CPU 8-core Jaguar
+ GPU 12CUs
+ 256bits Memory Controller
+ 4 DataMoves units
+ 32MB eSRAM

PS4 APU (3 billions transistors, ~250mm²)
+ CPU 8-core Jaguar
+ GPU 18CUs
+ 256bits Memory Controller

The biggest difference between APU is the 4 DataMoves units and 32MB of eSRAM... only the eSRAM is close to 2 billion transistors (40% of the Xbone APU).

The size are my estimates based in the official transistors counts... 450mm² vs 250mm².

Think like the Xbone have a "PS3 Cell" APU and PS4 have a "normal PC" APU.