People blame figureheads all the time, as they do have some control over what goes on.

Simple. Microsoft knew that their main audience was COD bros in the US. And American COD bros don't care about specs or price. They just want the next COD box in the same brand they had last time, because that's what they know.

And now Microsoft can spy on all the bros' COD make-out parties. Everybody wins.

Separate divisions mean a lot, in the sense that I don't see Sony TV/Movies passing up the chance to sell content on the Xbox One/360/Windows just because their Console division wants exclusives to help drive demand - nor do I see them skirting profit by allowing the console department to give any of it away, synergy only works if both divisions profit. The PS4 can mirror a Tablet to your TV? Did not know that.

The Xbox One works with most current setups just fine as most people do have cable setups and most people don't use PVRs (granted we're talking PVRs like the Hauppauge and not DVRs.). Streaming is the way to go, but it isn't there yet. Most services to watch live TV still require a cable subscription of some sort, and even they tend to be pretty limited. Maybe in 5 years, but by then something else will be out, at least it looks like this will be a relatively short generation.

The whole "live game streaming" is one of the most worthless things I've seen people hype up in a while. But if it makes the kids happy, so be it. Regardless, they're both pretty solid consoles, the PS4 is just stronger where it counts. And Microsoft really needs to stop saying "CLOUD!" as a crutch, it's cringe worthy. Can't wait for Gaikai/PS Now though.

Regardless, I get what Microsoft is trying to do, but the expensive console with subpar specs and $60 subscription fee will end it before it ever has a chance to catch on how they want it to. (I believe they anticipated hundreds of millions, escaping the "Game Console" term and becoming a "Home Media Device", it won't succeed unless they  make some serious changes.)

Blame Kinect and Don Mattrick.

Some say, it's a company decision.

The PS4's GPU, RAM, and CPU are beter. Plain and simple.

Edit: I also don't think Microsoft's main focus was gaming with this console.

Well im sure someone in your position would think so ;P. Just saying history shows that figureheads are always blamed for problems, since you don't exactly know the names of the entire board of directors lol. Then again they do have the final say and vision of where the company goes.

I'm not really surprised, every generation had more powerfull consoles and less powerfull ones due to different company policies and different tecnical solutions. Ps3 and 360 are more like the exception to the rule..

This!  If you scroll back a number of years back to the original Xbox.  MS was never shy to describe MS's entry into the home console market.  This is part of their road map from day 1.  Everyone has been fighting for the living room.  A place where whole familys gather and spend time.  TV marketing has known this is the holy grail for a long time and MS wanted a piece. 

Now we're into 2014 and you're seeing them still on the same path.  They want the living room, just like everyone else.   As we saw with the 360, it game out as a gaming system and slowly morphed over to a multimedia platform.  Now you could order a pizza, watch YouTube, Netflix and whatnot.  With the Xbone, now you have them going after regular TV watching habits.  Now they can see what you watch, how long you watch, and with Kinect, how many people are watching.  All this is valuable info.  We'll see how it pans out.

Also to note, MS has been pretty bad with hardware their entire history.  They did make some of the first ergonomic mice, but folks like Logitech always made them better.  They made big clunky keyboards (and still do), but other 3rd parties made them better.  Now you have Surface, Zune (RIP), and these other entries into HW landscape and still have to struggle.

MS is an interesting beast.  They make some much money from Office and Windows products, those two products fully fund everything that MS does.  It pays for their mistakes and gets their foot in the door for (video games) industries they dont know much about.  Not many companies have that type of backbone/safety net.

Going all out doesn't mean gamble. Going all in might be more approprate as that is an actually term in gambling.

I think what he means is that MS gambled by trying to do too much while Sony used its system resources to cater to the platform's strengths, games.