Sony is in a tough spot with the PS3 right now, but I do not at all believe it is doomed. Discontinuing the PS3 now would most likely be a bad move, as I would think it is set to be profitable in the near future. They have missed the chance to be number 1, but they can still aim for number 2.

If microsoft were able to overtake Sony in sales then why is the reverse not possible? Also, to my knowledge, the significant increase in xbox360 sales occurred just after the  price cuts (at least here in Australia anyway). If price cuts were able to increase sales for the xbox360, I don't see why a sales drop could not do something similar for the PS3.

um, at least here in Australia people take journalism (especialy opinion pieces which this is) with a grain of salt. Also, we're unlikely to ever know just what effect articles like this will have on potential consumers.

To be honest, I don't think you are an expert, and neither am I but one of the points that I alluded to in my previous post was that there is no here who is knowledgeable about the current internal situation of Sony and the SCE division, and therefore all comments about the likely future of the PS3 can be regarded as speculation. There have been no posts so far that by their content suggest they have been made by someone who is knowledgeable about Sony's current predicament and can therefore give an informed opinion. Though as it seems everyone has an opinion I don't see the dissemination of misinformation ceasing, however, I did want to flag the issue of validity (aka accuracy) in regards to peoples' opinions.

Jacezo, all console successors are at least in roundtable planning stages after every launch.  They look @ the mobo, chipsets,  new tech available and what would be viable 5-6 years down the line.

Sony won't dump the PS3, the majority of loses on the system have already been incurred and launching another system would result in the loss of even more money.

The smart thing to do would be to keep the system price high but start bundling it like crazy. Make new bundles with 4-5 games rather than reduce the price next year. Since games cost significantly less than systems to produce (since Sony's already paid for the development). This way you'll hold on to a segment of the market without bleeding even more money. Selling off a lot of its studio assets would also be a good idea, given PS3 and PSP first party game sales a lot of them are probably money pits at the moment, third party support (MGS4, GTA4, COD4,) seem to be driving sales anyhow.

I would hardly call the xbox entering an console market a fiasco. It was a calculated gamble on their part and judging from how well the 360 is doing this gen, it paid off.

Sony's got a fiasoco. From ps2 dominating consoles last gen to a dominating 3rd place this generation.

MSFT expected to take a loss on the Xbox.  It was an entry console only and it fulfilled its life as a stopgap to the Xbox 360.

The Washington Times recently gave too much credence to a bogus lawsuit claiming the Pres.-elect Obama was not a native-born citizen and thus not eligible to be president.

As far as I know, it is still owned by the Unification Church (Rev. Moon -- whose followers were called Moonies in the 1970s/80s and considered cultists). That has always given some people pause (I have even heard stories that to advance at the paper, you had to join the church - but that was when I worked in newspapers -- and actually free-lanced for the Washington Times) -- 15-20 years ago.

My point is ... consider the source.

The PS3 is not going anywhere. It is not disappearing. It is probably not going to make it out of third place. But Sony won't abandon the format because they cannot afford to do so.

The take away points from the column are (1) most people don't realize that BR-DVD players upscale standard disks and (2) there is an upper bound as to how much people truly care about how their movies on TV look (or are willing to pay for it to look).

Mike from Morgantown

But, most of those owners bought a PS2 when it was dirt cheap. Look at the numbers - folks are still buying PS2s. And they will keep buying the console. If you have a huge PS2 game library, there's only one show in town that plays PS2 games - yeah, the PS2. Those owners have no reason whatsoever to upgrade to a system that doesn't play their PS2 games. That's why the 360 is gaining. It pretty much offers the same HD experience as a PS3 for much, much cheaper. You can buy two 360s for the price of 1 PS3. Sales are NOT generated by osmosis.

Well, cancelling the PS3 (and I agree that that would mean the complete division, maybe minus PSP) would save Sony loads and loads of money. They can sell most of their development houses (they have a lot) and keep the profitable ftranchises (like GT and GoW) which will get the company massively in the black.

The PS3 done its job as the device that deliverd the victory against HD-DVD, without the loss making SCE division there would be much more liquidity to fund the HD battle versus formidable competitors like Philips and Samsung.

I DON'T THINK THIS WILL HAPPEN, but you asked why they would to it. There are definitely benefits for Sony to kill SCE. That Microsoft lost more on the Xbox is irrelevant. MS has always had a much better balance sheet and their goal for the Xbox wasn't profit, but a way into the livingroom. Not to mention thatXbxo didn't cost anywhere near the insane 3 billion + Sony has lost so far on the PS3. (All the profits of the PS2 - the most successfull console ever - gone in just 2 years).

Sorry, my furry friend, but I don't think anyone is going to fall for your post.

OT: I am amazed at one thing - the sheer number of recent news about Sony's *pending* demise. The power of the media is no joke!