Wow.... I thought it was just ignorance before but I see now... you're just a fucking idiot.
Stifling innovation... that's a new one. I guess the PS2 was stifling innovation too! Oh but the original Xbox caught on.... maybe Sony is just stiffening a dick up their own ass by selling a 600 dollar system with quite possibly the most horrid games to ever launch with a system.
Of the non-multiplatform games only 1, that's right 1, has gained an overal review score (as reported by www.gamerankings.com) of over 80% and that's Resistance. That's 1 of 5 incase you didn't know... it has only 5 non-multiplatform games at this point and even so, the multiplatform ones run better on the Xbox 360.
Having 3 games below 60% and one at 35% is absolutly ridiculous. Shit, they've even rushed a broken game out the door (Motorstorm) in Japan to try and boost their sales.
Sony is doing this to themself, MS has no blame in this other than they have a year head start (and probably will next generation too). They created a system that's expensive, has no games, is hard to program for AND are selling each system for about a 200-300 dollar loss (which is more than the original Xbox ever was ladies and gentlemen). No one's fucking them except themselves.
edit:
And when ever I hear someone touting the PS3's innovation, why is they always bring up the Cell Processor? Which is where I'm almost sure you were going. It's a multi-core processor, that's all it fucking is. Those have been around for years.... 2000 actually, IBM (which makes the 360's processor) released the first multicore processor. For your information, the xbox 360 uses a multicore processor. The only thing special about the Cell is that it has 9 dies, only 8 of which are actually used (I can't remember what the 9th is used for), however that doesn't mean jack shit and I don't feel like explaining how it works. If you're interested on how it works (which is somewhat interesting but for gaming applications it seems incredibly stupid), go google it.
However if you knew jack shit about how electronics work, the bottleneck for gaming is almost never with the CPU, it's with the GPU. In which case the GPU and it's architecture used in the Xbox 360 is clearly better. More memory bandwidth and a seperate memory die that allows for some of the fancier anti aliasing, better control of how images look in a 3d enviorment, and better image blending. This has been proven in graphics comparisons of multiplatform games where the 360's graphics are almost always clearly better and less jagged (which can be accredited to it's better architecture for FSAA). We'll also not go into how Direct X is better than OpenGL (I'm sure you can guess which system uses which....)