Thanks... Sony does make great software but to say it is the best in the world is maybe stretching it (though please stretch on). There are definitely good developers outside of Sony and they deserve as much credit and respect for quality and quantity of work. My feeling is you need both quality and quantity to be truly great - I can take 10 years on a project for quality but it commits to much resources to one project (when I worked gov projects 10 years was ok but commercial.... )economic failure.

There are so many software paths that no one group can or should try to master them all. Games, Control Systems(embedded or otherwise), Operating systems, CAD/CAM, Analysis, DB etc, etc, etc... no one company is best in all fields - we only wish we are!

Focus is the key to Sony so that is why SCEI has a many different groups each assigned a different task that is specific to them such as firmware, game development, hardware development. And there can be more then 1 of each group which allows multiple developmental lines for different products.

like about Microsoft software is that if they try to put a feature in they put it in too much. like vista they wanted it too have good security then they put too much security in you get warnings for everything you do

Yes they are Hardware first but they definitely are also a software company.... less then 20 companies in the world have more programmers then Sony employs.

are wholly owned subsidiaries ^_-
that is .. they are part of Sony
Thus they are ... SONY

It's more of a generalization ^_^ but yes I do understand your position.

I don't see that much demand to switch to linux but I do see a desire to return to the more open free range days of the early PC world. Microsoft with each update constrains the development path more and more.
I for one don't use linux all that much (I use BSD and Solaris with a toss of OS X (bsd lite) and Windows but I respect and understand those who think linux is great. I can't abide the GNU license as it removes to much control from myself of my product and I know many (namely almost all that I have ever worked for) companies who feel the same way... linux licenses throw out the baby with the bath water.

"It's more of a generalization ^_^ but yes I do understand your position."

of course

"I don't see that much demand to switch to linux but I do see a desire to
return to the more open free range days of the early PC world. Microsoft
with each update constrains the development path more and more.
I for one don't use linux all that much (I use BSD and Solaris with a toss
of OS X (bsd lite) and Windows but I respect and understand those who
think linux is great."

I used linux more or less as placeholder ([ ]).

"I can't abide the GNU license as it removes to much control from myself
of my product and I know many (namely almost all that I have ever
worked for) companies who feel the same way... linux licenses throw out
the baby with the bath water."

There is a point for each licensing scheme whether its GNU GPL,
BDS-style, or whatever. Its rather difficult to have a brain-dead
commercially successful license that does not blow the whole system
out of the water.

The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.

Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.

15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.

Let me be clear. This is sarcasm