I've never said that Nintendo controls the living room, so that's not my logic that's pissing you off. The terms "control of the living room" or "battle for the living room" are not about just any kind of electronical home components. These are very recent terms, maybe 10 years old, about smart devices that can do way more than the old screens and players. It's about the battle between traditional electronics companies and the incoming computer companies trying to control what you're watching and how. Most of the devices in TheRealMaffoo's list have no relevance to who is winning the living room, because they are "dumb" in a computing sense, generic and could be replaced by devices from any other company.

Now now Gearbox. You need to play nice in the sandbox with reverie. Consider this your warning.

To comment on your post, wouldn't controlling the living room mean controlling both the electronics aspect and the furniture aspect? I mean not everyone has a game system, DVD player or even a T.V. in their living room, but everybody has furniture in it. What say you on that sir?

@ Onyxmeth
I had begun to write that it must also inculde the furniture but then I thought, "Companies like Apple are trying to control the living room and I don't see any any apple chairs or couchs" So I assumed it did not include Furniture.

they failed from both sides, the laser disc one(ps3)since blue ray won and the gaming one (wii)

and if the ps3 or the wii get a video store, their plan its screwed.

My definition of control is different from yours.  I believe a company has control if they can influence behavior.  I do not believe Sony has control of the living room at all.  Look at PS2 versus PS3.  Both are great products, and the PS3 is certainly a better built machine than the PS2.  But Sony priced it out of the market.  As such, people that would have bought the PS3 have flocked to the Xbox 360, Wii, and even PC games to get their gaming fix and the gaming market is growing without Sony domination.  The same thing would happen with TVs.  Yes, the Bravia is a quality TV.  But, if Sony decided to raise prices on the Bravias by $500, the HDTV market wouldn't slow down.  People would just buy Sharp, Samsung, or some other quality brand they find.  Control is something like what the oil companies have going.  People can only decrease their demand so much before they have to pay $5, $6, or $7 a gallon of gas.  Because the oil companies clearly have control.  Another example of control is Windows.  Yes, there are a couple of alternatives, the biggest being Macs.  But for most people the programs they want will only work on Windows so they have to pay Microsofts tax on computers. 

Also, Best Buy is horribly overpriced and unless they have a BOGO, I wouldn't dream of buying Blu-Rays there.  Amazon is the place for Blu-Rays. 

Blu Ray                                    DVD            Difference
Iron Man  27.95                      22.99             $4.96    21.6%

Cloverfield 16.95                     15.99             $0.96      6.0%

Transformers 27.95                 24.99            $2.96      11.8%

So, yes, Blu-Rays do cost more than DVD.  But the biggest discrenpancies are those such as Batman Begins, where you are looking at a two year bargin DVD versus a brand new Blu Ray.  And on Amazon there are several bargin Blu Rays for $10-$15.  So it might be little while but Blu Ray is certainly setting itself up to take over the market.    

This thread is hilarious. All the Wii fanboys want to make Nintendo the God of the living room. The fact that Sony sells more electronic devices than M$ and Nintendo, that are NORMALLY found in a living room doesn't seem to matter to them.

http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/press_release/0,1014,sid%253D2283%2526cid%253D191981,00.html

Sony is ranked 7th, there is also a paragraph talking about Nintendo's extreme growth....

Want to know who controls the living room? That is a list of the top 250 consumer product companies

What's hilarious is Nintendo is valued more as a company than Sony despite the fact that Sony has such huge revenues.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/06/25/nintendo-sony-cap-markets-equity-cx_jc_0625markets3.html  This article is really before the Wii explosion and a quick look at the market shows that Nintendo is valued well above Sony.  So for you control = revenues.  But the people that speak with their money back Nintendo.

Of course control is revenue...

The kid with the most toys wins... The fact that people are buying stock in Nintendo has nothing to do with control. It's an investment decision based on instant payoff as they have probably education in sales trends and know it will increase at least for another year, so buying now will increase their own bank account.. But nice article. And a good read for anyone interested.

Why is it that this point is always dwelled upon? Of course Microsoft is loosing, they aren't selling as much (dosn't take a rocket scientist) but damn they have increased their market share and are actually making money with a system that I wouldn't be embarrased to say I own (If I had one). So yeah they're loosing the race but still winning in business terms (trust me M$ would have bout Nintendo or Sony had they not thought they could make more net profit from going it alone).

I think it's pretty clear that he meant home consoles as handhelds wouldn't apply to "controlling the living room," but even then....

The PS1 sold 106 million units, not 70 million, so even by that standard, Sony has still sold more consoles in the last ten years. 16 million more, to be exact.