Clearly it doesn't mean Sony is going the way of SEGA just yet. But as a PS3 owner it does bug me that Sony are not responding to the core problem with the PS3, i.e. that its extremely over-priced. I know many people who would like to have a PS3 but can't afford it. Maybe a price cut would help rather than feeble attempts at putting a positive spin on an increasingly bad situation.

Haven't you heard that they are going to reduce the processor's size, which will make it cheaper. Once they do that, they will lower the price. RElax. The PS3 is only Two years old and the Xbox is three years old. M$ could of afforded to lower it's price because of the age of their console life cycle.

As for the article, I don't think the Saturn sold 20 Million consoles. Sony has invested way too much into the PS3 and it's technologies. It's not going away and get over it.

I'm a lifetime lover of PS but I'm pissed at Sony. Sony put itself in a corner by allowing the marketing dept to dictate the hardware instead of the developers. The PS3 was originally slated to have TWO cell processors, one as a CPU, one as a GPU. When they discovered the cell architecture doesn't translate well to a GPU, they scrambled and put a real GPU in there even though the motherboard wasn't designed for it. The bottleneck on the PS3 between the cell and the GPU is SLOWER than the PS2!!! This is why we'll never see the cell's potential because it can't be used to deliver screen graphics, but it can deliver superior physics and streaming, which is useless when the end results can't be rendered due to the hobbled Frankentstein architecture. I'm picking up an Xbox 360 this week because I have NetFlix and I'm sick of seeing all my friends play the games that deep down inside I REALLY want to play too... :(

lol@PS3

Bit of an unfair comparision, the Saturn was a much better console than the PS3.