I like how the article (and its link to the article pushing the PS3) both ignore the continued existence of the $200 "Arcade" unit. Tell you what. I'll use the same approach:
---
Attention! Microsoft introduces bare-bones Xbox 360 with smaller internal storage and a pricetag $100 lower than the recently announced PS3 Slim! With this entry, Microsoft seeks to one-up the competition - both from Sony and their mutual rival, Nintendo - by offering the most affordable current-generation gaming console in the market. Combined with what is widely regarded as the most robust library of AAA titles, this new Xbox 360 package may prove irresistible to financially weary consumers this holiday season.
---
I also stifle a chuckle at the various folks who have implied that the PS3's price has been the only thing keeping it from being a success. Developers would beg to differ, since it takes a great deal more time and money to eke a 360-like performance out of the PS3, and generally involves sacrifices, such as anti-aliasing or reduced texture detail. Someone already said it earlier: The PS3 had three years to prove its hardware superiority. The only argument a person can still make is a deliberately vague one: To say that the PS3 has a "hardware advantage" (Blu-ray, Wifi) without specifically admitting that its visual capabilities are in fact inferior, as Konami themselves demonstrated with their three-year, 720p, 24fps masterpiece.