This is very tempting.....but I still can't figure out how they can charge an extra $100+ for the 80gig when the difference in HDDs is only about $20

The other thing is thst the 80 can play ps2/ps1 games. The 40 can't.

Now why would they remove that part of the system? Again it couldn't cost that much for the lower processor and components? Not a big deal to me though. Does the 40 still have all the other features of the 80 ie, blu ray player and such or did they strip that out of it as well. I really should start researching the PS3 to see what they are doing.

It doesn't really save them money to cut backwards compatibility, but it does inspire more sales of new software. That was actually their explanation. No one could believe they were so up-front about it.

When the PS3 first came out, they were saying how important backwards compatibility is, and how their competitor having less-than-wonderful BC was unconscionable. I guess the value of their PS2 library is a thorn in their side now, and it's time to cut that necessary feature. That being said, I never cared about BC. I get the new systems to play the new games, but when they're being such bulgeclutchers over it, it makes me sick.

So yeah, I'm fine with the new model. I'm just wondering how they can have such crap PR.

I don't play any of the old games anymore either, I just got the new Ratchet and Clank for PS3, the kids love it and the graphics are pretty awesome.
The PS3 is still Imo the best Blu ray player on the market.

I have no doubt about it being the best Blu-ray player. The only thing I hate is the fan noise. I must have been lucky with my Xbox 360s or unlucky with my PS3, as both the 360 that died and my new one are way quieter than my PS3. Generally, people seem to think the PS3 is quieter. So the fan noise is a little distracting during quiet scenes in movies. That's my only problem with it. One of these days my equipment will be in a walk-in closet behind double-paned glass or something.

I'm curious. Would anyone have paid $90 more for their game boxes if they were designed without fans?

YES! and quiter drive motors too.

Yeah, when PS2 hardware sales have been almost twice the PS3 hardware sales over the past few months, Sony had to do *something* to spur (force) growth in the PS3 software sales. Just seems like another proving point that Sony doesn't care about the consumer, just their bottom line, but that is a personal opinion. Everyone is entitled to disagree, and that is fine. I'm not the type of person to get all worked up about such things.

I would certainly pay a premium for silent operation and a more rugged build. It would be nice if both Microsoft and Sony offered such a higher-end model. Unfortunately, multiple versions of consoles are already a touchy subject for the videogame hardcore, and somewhat confusing for would-be consumers. Quieter consoles will come eventually, when chips inevitably shrink, but it sucks that so much of the consoles' lives will see them screaming.

The problem with the PS3 is Sony must have forgotten it's a game platform, while the Xbox360 and Wii keep coming out with great games, PS3 has only had three or four games that I would consider decent since it was released.
I bought it primarily for the Blu-ray, but rabid game fans who bought the console for gaming have got to be getting a little pissed off by now.

I walked through the Futureshop by me late this afternoon and they still had lots of these out in the aisle. The pile looked like it hadn't even been touched.