" 

 == what is more powerful? == 

 is the ps3 more powerful then the xbox 360 or vice versa? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by   •  . 
 :PS3. . . DUH!  
 ::very debateable actually..... pretty rude response for a registered user! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by   . 

 PS3 is pretty much all areas. Although the fanboys here will try and dispute this.  However look at some independant specs   
 :Theoretical numbers make the PS3 look like a massive super server beast of ultimate performance. However, when you compare the cost of one of those to the PS3, you'd laugh at the logical fallacy. Sony claimed the PS2 would render ""Toy Story Graphics"" on the PS2. I don't think even the 360 can render ""Toy Story Graphics"" in real time. The cycle is probably set on loop. Sony claims they have god-like machine, but machine isn't god-like. Again. The only comparison with the Cell I have heard is that it seems as powerful as a 800Mhz Pentium 3 (using only the main core). Incase you didn't know, that's really shitty. But the 360's CPU isn't as good as it sounds either.  

 == Why are severe technical issues hidden? == 

 Hello. 
 I was wondering why all of the defects and technical issues are so hidden in the article? 
 Unless I'm missing something, the only acknowledgements I can find are in the launch section (where they have a link to the Xbox_360_technical_problems article that doesn't stand out at all, and is only linked for context of the launch), and in the ""Physical appearance"" section (again, linked inline to the same article, but only linked for context of the light). 
 The issues themselves should be at least partially addressed right in the main article. At the very least, the links shouldn't be hidden so well. They are still happening, even on machines from outside of the launch window. 
 (Incidentally, for an interesting read, take a look at Matt Casamassina's ign blog entry about being on his fifth 360 here)   
 :Allo? No comments? I'd much rather have one of you (more talented) writers add this than me.   

 Nobody cares. Or everybody is to biased in the 360's favor to bother. 
 I don't care either way.   

 Because they get deleted by Xbox fanboys who can't believe the console is nothing but an unreliable hunk of junk..   
 : No.  It's because Wikipedia is not a soapboax.   
 ::You know, I realize that you probably intended to only address the 'fanboy' comment, but you still phrased it as an answer to my question. And WP not being a soapbox is entirely irrelevant. As it is, the link to the article about technical problems is now far more prominent for those interested in that information. So, the answer to my original question was: The article was broken. But at least now it's fixed.   

 ==Xbox DVD drive speed== 
 The Xbox 360's 12x DVD-ROM drive is compared with the PlayStation 3's Blu-ray drive's speed at reading Blu-ray discs (2x, or 72mbit/s, just under 9 mebibytes per second) but this is not clarified in the article. The way it reads implies a straight comparison of DVD read speeds. The DVD-ROM read speed of the PS3 drive is 8x or about 10.5 megabytes per second. Since this seems to be a contentious article I just thought I'd point it out that it's misleading and ambiguous. I would recommend either adding a qualifier that identifies the 8.6 megabytes per second figure as the Blu-ray read speed or just leaving it out. 

 Oh wait, looks like somebody already took out the reference to the PS3.   

 == sold 10.4 million vs actual number sold to consumers unknown == 

 The original version of the statement was ""The console sold out completely at release and by the end