so basically your first post was saying that we shouldnt trust sony because they didnt want people to move to microsofts cloud? such monsters.

sony invested a lot in blueray and made a great product with it. just because microsoft fucked up its own online strategy and has to use a product sony helped create doesnt mean we have to hate sony for it. they are a business after all, but they arent the ones who tried to fuck us over, unlike MS

I think you've missed the point he's making.

if i did, its 6 am here. im pretty sleepy and im not really focused 100% perfect

I'm saying that Sony is touting itself up as being the "hero" of the gaming industry by not going the way of DRM, and using the wave of uproar against Microsoft for it's own personal gain in the BluRay market.

Sony invested a lot in BluRay in ways that should be classed as anti-competitive. Read up on exclusitivity contracts that Sony signed with movie studios whike HD-DVD was the market LEADER! The people had spoken, but Sony used it's funds to push the market to it's advantage and muscle HD-DVD out of the market. How is that "a great product" again? It's quite funny how you're defending Sony's honesty with an example of how they've used capital corruption to buy their way into the market leadership. Try again.

the EXACT same thing can be said about MS in the gaming industry, they bought there way into it, and still are doing it. atleast sony had a much better product on their hands. 

You're clutching at straws now. I could bring up how Sony bought a lot of 3rd party support with THEIR entrance into the videogame industry, but we're digressing too far from the original topic so I'll ask again:

Do you believe that Sony does NOT has a vested interest in Microsoft selling more of their games on BluRay media than on their cloud? Yes or no?

Can you trust any Multi-Billion Dollar Company with Investors?

Hell no.

Unless it makes them money.

A quick couple thoughts/points on this discussion...
1. It is a legitimate question, and as i have seen other users post with a similar concern, but most of which may be sony fans.. But that is a moot point, As i myself was interested in nextX since a lot of ppl seem to like it. So it is fair concern for any potential customer.
2. Replies seem to be riddled with uppity x-defenders for no other reason than to bash the competition... The question was about ms not sony, although comparisons are useful for constructive conversations it doesnt look like most are using it that way...
3. Linux removal was because of geohot and similar users abusing that feature, and is why there are still a plethora of cfw available for the ps3. If it werent for the Initial abusers of this feature that enabled the ability for pirating games and hacking games it wouldn't have been removed.
4. Users WERE PROMPTED and told that the other OS feature was being removed. I remember this clearly as that was at a point i still actually read the fine print before installing updates.
________________
(opinion) i.ve never really trusted ms and think the only innovations they brought was how to charge people for stuff that isnt neccessary.. Having only played x3 a few times, and some research on xbl, i dont see any recognizable differences between online play. Heck i even used xb connenct to play online with original xbox. More to the point can one realky trust Ms after all this? I for one think not really, but much like sony they may now be in a better position to earn that trust... Sony learned that early current gen and with the anon attack. There was a big difference between how each adressed the audience @ last years e3 ms acted like it was our priveledge to use their products while sony was apologetic and acted like it was their priveledge to have us as consumers. Which i don't think ms has learned yet at all...
5 posting on my phone... Damn comp not getting power...

Funny how you don't include things like initial costs to build new factories as opposed to upgrading DVD factories to use HD-DVD, or costs to produce/license individual discs. Funny indeed.

You do realise that the market followed a similar trend with VHS vs Betamax, right? Betamax would have been classed as superior in quality, yet VHS became the market leader. Do you know why? I'll give you a hint. Read the paragraph above once again.

Are you trying to justify that Sony did right in buying studio support through exclusitivity contracts, despite the higher capital costs that people would be forced to shell out with BluRay?