The overall message of the article I can agree with but there's some pretty stupid things in there too. The worst is :

"We all know the xbox 360 is in the lead right now but they're not selling to anyone that isn't outside their xbox 1 fan base and install base."

We all know that's not true, the 360 won't stop selling once it reaches 26.8 millions, he uses the same logic as Crazzyman in his infamous "Marioboys" thread, that's not a good sign.

Only a few billion dollars but what's a billion between friends

For a blog whose moniker claims "no bias" this article I found to be extremely skewed to portray the PS3 in a positive light.

I have no expectation (nor do I hope) that the PS3 is dying, or going to disappear or any such non-sense. But to believe that they are where they want to be is absolutely ridiculous. Sony wants the PS3 to be where the Wii is, period.

The biggest loss, IMO, that Sony suffered this generation is the fact that they are no longer the dominant platform. Specifically, in past generations if you wanted to reach the mass market, you had to work with Sony and fit in development for the xbox and gc only if you had the time/resources. This is no longer true. Because of this, the PS2 did NOT have to pay for exclusivity as it offered access to the largest portion of potential buyers, another fact that is no longer true.

Given the high cost of the PS3 and the trojan horse Blu-Ray model, I expect that Sony has achieved at least part of their goals for this generation (Blu-Ray standard) but doubt they will ever achieve them all (complete market dominance as in past generations).

the ps3 cost was over 800$ to manufacture.

they were giving you 200$ .

They lost around 40 million users in the process of the PS3.

Hmm, "Price!"

sales and a good machine which breaks down very few years

Let's see, money, exclusives, fans, some respect along the lines, their minds, you name it

Not everyone.