Actually, if you knew something about consumer electronics (or maybe had some common sense), time to work out the kinks is what you have BEFORE a consumer product launch. When the product is in customer's hands how are you suppose to work out the Kinks? Sony delaying the launch of the PS3, actually gave them more time to "work out the kinks" of the PS3.

MS took a risk getting their console out the gate first, and so far it's been working despite the hardware problems. You and every other Sony fanboy constantly pose the question why things are still working for MS, and people are still "loyal"; the answer is simple, the 360 has many great games as well as a great online service. Which for most people who just love gaming, and not brands, is more than enough of a reason to put up with the inconvenience of the hardware failures.

You can point the fingers all you want about fanboyism (as I've said before, I am a fanboy, a video game fanboy which has no problems being critical), but with ignorant, nonsensical comments like these, you are constantly displaying your Sony fanboyism.

Don't listen to the Toad, he just pulls random quotes and videos without actually understanding the context or really the topic at hand.

With CPU's, when you push the envelop on performance, there's a direct trade off between Heat vs Performance. The more transistors squeezed onto a CPU wafer the greater the performance (in simple terms transistors are what do the work, so the more there are, the more work can be done per an amount of time). But then the problem becomes over heating, and heat is the enemy when it comes to electronics, whether it's a threat to the silicon, or more dangerously to the contact/solder points of the components.

In time, the ability to fit the same performance architechture on smaller sized CPU wafer becomes available, and with that the heat output goes down. And those CPUs become cheaper to manufacture.

I'm not going to look up the specific clock speeds, but let me put it this way, the Wii has a CPU and GPU, as well as total RAM that's approximately equivalent in specs to the old Xbox (in some areas the Xbox even has more juice). While the PS3 uses a cutting edge asymmetrical multicore Cell CPU and the 360 uses a cutting edge symmetrical 3 core CPU (they were both designed by IBM). These are facts.

The three rings error on the 360 is directly tied to heat, more often then not the contacts of the GPU melt. I personally attribute this to MS being obsessed with making the 360 have the smallest form factor possible (one of the biggest criticisms of the Xbox was that it was a big black box). If Sony made the original PS3 smaller (and there's no arguing that the PS3 is bigger than the 360, though its curves do make it optically look slimmer), they may have had more problems as well.

But now that the 360 Jasper chipset is in all newly manufactured 360s, I think the reliability will improve a lot, as the smaller, more efficient architecture outputs less heat. Similarly, Sony was able to reduce the form factor of the PS3 in the PS3 Slim, due to similar advancements with the Cell architechture.

The overarching point is the more a company decides to push the technological envelop, the greater the reliability risks (which can be mitigated), and Nintendo with the Wii played it extremely safe on the technological level (though they took a chance as it relates to the video game control paradigms).

Well, they haven't been tested anywhere near as much, and old tech will have had the chance to have been improved upon. Something you've just brought out obviously won't have been.