NomadG

Like Sony and Honda, Nintendo is not part of a Keiretsu (you could have found that out just by reading the very Wikipedia entry you linked to) as well as a dozen other resources. What makes conventional takeovers hard in Japan is government laws that make outright foreign ownership nearly impossible to achieve. Keiretsu has nothing to do with that. So, yes, an outright American takeover of a major Japanese brand is pretty much impossible but not because of the reason you mention.

And companies making profits get taken over all the time. There is a reason, after all, that they have value. That reason doesn't fly either.

No, the reason that it won't happen is because Nintendo's brand is too strong and unique to go all North California Feng Shue (sp?) on us.

Such a deal makes no business sense either. They don't compete in the same markets for the most part and the markets where they could be competing in the future would require a product line to be shut down and all their product lines are too strong.

Major corporate mergers are pretty much out of style, especially ones between too healthy companies who don't really compete with each other.

If they wanted to work with each other to battle MS or Sony, they could do that just as easyly without the legal and corporate culture headaches that go with a merger. You can even make a big time product without actually merging companies. Or perhaps I missed the Sony/IBM/Toshiba (Cell) merger or the Apple/IBM/Motorola (PowerPC) merger or the Microsoft/nVidia (Xbox) merger or the HP/Intel (Itanium) merger.

It’s a pipe dream like the author said, just not really for the reasons stated.

I think this was a needless dustup between two great sites. The Inquirer is much better at finding real news than Joystiq. They are also better writers, if you are into British humor. Joystiq is a much better blog (and let's not kid ourselves, the Inquirer isn't much different than a blog really) and has wonderful links and commentary.

I do have that run-for-the-exits feeling when a blogger speaks about journalist ethics, ESPECIALLY where tech journalism is concerned. I think Grant's slam of the Inquirer was really unnecessary. Its possible that the Inq's Demerjian is simply wrong. But there is nothing to believe he is making this up other than the fact that it may be bad news for certain fan boys. The Inq often notes when things should be taken with a grain of salt. They did not do that here. And the author has his name all over it. It'll be there for all to see if the PS3 hits the shelves on time, in volume, and smokes the doors off the Xbox 360. The Inq will be damaged by it if that is the case. So, this will work itself out.

I do think he many not understand the tech. He probably talked with a developer (who likely was not just some anonymous guy, but rather a regular source) who hates developing for the PS3. I don't know. I think many of the commenters here have done a lot better job of shedding light on where the PS3's design actually makes sense. But, Grant offered none of that. A link to 15 month old article based on the press released tech specs does not count as a debunking.

Tech specs and real world development are not the same things. Its quite possible that the total package of the Cell/nVidia/Rambus design is F'd up. Its also quite possible that Sony et al nails it and the Inq will look silly. But the fact is that the PS3 isn't out yet and there was nothing presented at E3 that made one think that November is a realistic date for the PS3 to be out in volume with a lot of playable titles. The Xbox 360 is out and works quite well. The PS3 is untested and unreleased. So, rumors and speculation is all we have.

Kudos to LuckyT and Cabbage for some quality comments.

(P.S. - I almost certainly mispelled some things and have bad grammar. Try judging the content, yo!)