They are quite likely to "make a lot of sense" - also (or, particularly) with the launch of next gen in 2012/2013.

All those dozens of millions of installed, very capable systems (and in one case, still among the best Bluray players; in another, recently "uprated" with Kinect) won't disappear overnight, won't be replaced very rapidly by next gen. Particularly when the dynamics change: when systems became more connected during last gen, more relying on digital downloads (of all kinds, basically finally becoming the prophecised set-top-box bringing new level of music/Last.fm/films/Netflix/"new TV"), also with ~indy titles which are bound to be produced for a few more years; when the average(!! ...that means, typically, a laptop with integrated GFX) new PC only recently approached (according to Gabe Newell of Valve, for example) the GFX/gaming power of present console generation, when the capabilities of the latter don't yet really limit what's possible in game mechanics.

Really, there's no reason (whatever the angle - unnecessarily cranking up conspicuous consumption, or: it would piss off too many owners) to almost demand simply dumping this hugely valuable, installed base (laboriously built up over several years).

It's easy to imagine the present generation systems getting 3 or so years of quite decent support, after the launch of their successors. Sony basically did just that already with PS1 and PS2 (not MS with Xbox1, but they evidently wanted to drop this a bit flawed, when it comes to market practicalities, first attempt of theirs)

And so, next-next-gen will be probably in the 20s, in the third decade of this century... crap, I'm getting old.

I assume the first year is supposed to be 2011, or this doesn't make sense.

These reports are confusing. if the Xbox loop is suppose to have Windows 9 core, but yet will debute around the same time now that Windows 8 will, then either that statement about Xbox loop having a Windows 9 base core was false or MS threw out that idea in order to push the release a year early.

I really hope whatever they end up doing that they dont skimp on the graphics card with a 40nm part...

If they incorperated a 28nm mobile chip that was designed on 28nm then not only would they save on power but also on price, heat and size.

Odds are they are going the same way as the wii2, with outdated 3 year old graphics technology.. what a REAL shame this will be

Releasing a new console with the supposed specs in the next two years would be a major disappointment. Since the advent of the previous generation there isn't any major technological improvement. All they've introduced are some lame-ass laggy motion controllers. There are no major improvement in graphics, no raytracing, no near movie quality visuals... I bet they won't be able to run the "Samaritan" demo. If the next generation of consoles could not deliver better than "Samaritan" ingame graphics and some new generation of ultracool controllers - they'll suck.
And 2Gb of RAM? What they are thinking??!!!!
If they release these consoles now - we'll be stuck again with crappy graphics on the PC for another 8 years.

They better not releasing anything before they offer something truly new!

If Microsoft has something new coming soon, it'll will likely be announced as a new console in 2012 and launched in late-2013. I doubt we'll see a console in 2012. Sony already made it very clear that they do not intend to go on to a PS4 any time soon--and said that even when they do, it won't be much more powerful than PS3. (Fact is, the PS3 hurt Sony's pocketbook with their initial profit loss, and though they been making a profit for 3 years now, they've still got plenty of money left to wring from the PS3.)

But at most, my personal guess is that Microsoft will come out with a slightly more powerful version of the Xbox 360 (since significantly outshining the Wii U will not be necessary, nor is the financially-exhausting gaming-console technology necessary for significantly outshining the Wii U really realistic as a goal), while Sony goes with the PS3 for about 5-6 years more (they claim 10+ years), since even God of War III didn't even use half the PS3'S total power and it cost developers a whopping $44 million to develop GoW3 even at THAT level.

But Sony and Microsoft's biggest problem will be a new coming threat to console gaming: the coming advent of cloud service HD gaming directly on SmartTVs (it's coming, people). Both Microsoft and Sony's deal won't be trying to bring out a new monster console, but just trying to stay relevant as console companies altogether. The dedicated gaming console, like the dedicated gaming handheld, are becoming endangered and will soon become questionable in their relevancy (sadly, because I love them both).

I think Nintendo's heading in the right direction with their Wii U controller (if it catches on, and I think it will, with time), its possible cloud service with Acer, and their trying to appeal to all kinds of gamers with a universal controller. Though many here may cry about its graphical capability being "late" (even though, technically, it'll outpower PS3 graphics by quite a bit), I think Nintendo realizes that in order to stay relevant with consoles, they'll have to focus of a universal control scheme, newly-emerging cloud services and better sociable online experiences than what's out there now (all of which proposed about Wii U), all more than mere graphics.

We'll be seeing PS3-ish graphics for about a decade with consoles, because we're approaching a graphics barrier with consoles--gaming console technology cost far more money to improve than gaming PCs. So I sincerely doubt we'll be seeing consoles any time soon from Microsoft OR Sony. They will likely spend 8th-gen just dabbling with slightly-advanced versions of their current consoles, taking it easy for generation 8 of consoles.

Besides, Microsoft and Sony are not really what you call "gaming" companies--they're both more like near-monopolizing companies who have many other investments in computers and electronics with only financial interest in the gaming market as a side investment, but would quickly pull out whenever it starts getting too pricey or risky. Nintendo's been a game company for 122 years, relies solely on games today, and will need games to survive like the air they breathe, so they need Wii U more than Sony and Microsoft need successors.