I didn't think it had happened, however according to
http://www.vgchartz.com/ the Wii has now gone ahead of the 360 in terms of total sales.
Ray, I don't see why you say that the PS3 will win on future games, why would it? I'm not aware of anything other than a couple of big titles that are PS3 exclusive, and even fewer that the 360 does not have an answer for.
To list a few:
Gran Tourismo - Forza2, PGR4
Tekken - ?? (no shortage of fighting game, though none that measure up to Tekken)
Killzone - Halo 3
Little Big Planet - n/a
Heavenly Sword - Ninja Gaiden (is that 360 exclusive? does it matter since Heavenly Sword is only getting average reviews?)
Tekken and LGP are two that are good for the PS3, but there are plenty of 360 exclusive games coming that will counter that. I definitely don't see anything that will cause a major sales surge for the PS3.
The 360 does have Halo3 very soon, that is likely to sell alot of new consoles, so I wouldn't expect the Wii to stay in front for long (though whether sales will be sustained is another matter)
As for the technical specs of the 360 and PS3, it is far from clear cut. On paper, the CPU of the PS3 is faster than the CPU in the 360, however in 'real world' situations this counts for very little. Due to the very different ways that the two CPUs are designed, the 360 is much easier to use, it has 3 full cores which can all be used as required, while the PS3 has 1 full core with 6 (or 7) minor cores - the total theoretical power of these cores is more than the 360, however the use of these minor cores has limitations which makes it much harder to take advantage of them.
On the GPU (graphic processing unit) side of things, I believe that the 360 leads this field. Both consoles have highly capable GPUs (PS3 by nVidia, 360 by ATI), with architecture similar to the PC cards, in standard terms there would be very little between the two. However, the 360 has a small advantage due to a feature that is only now coming into PC graphic cards called a Unified Pipeline. the PS3, and most PC cards, work with separate pipelines for the vertex shaders (these handle polygon level shading) and pixel shaders (these handle the finer levels of graphic shading) - this means that given a GPU with 8 vertex and 8 pixel, if a draw request comes through requiring 12 pixel and 4 vertex pipelines, then the request will take 2 cycles as only 8 pixels can be done in one cycle (add to that, vertex pipelines are sitting idle while the pixel ones are overworked!). With the 360 unified pipelines, the GPU simply has 16 pipelines that can handle either type, so for the same 12 pixel, 4 vertex request, the GPU can process it in a single cycle. If you apply that across a whole scene creation, then in some scenarios the 360 could be vastly quicker than the PS3. The difference between this and the CPU comparison is that the 360 GPU is easy to develop for and does not require highly specialist knowledge (compared to the PS3 CPU Vs the 360 CPU).
Then add in the memory, not only does the 360 have more memory than the PS3 to begin with, it is also unified memory as well, so which the PS3 has some RAM and some GFX memory, the 360 has 512MB of memory that can be used for anything - again, more flexibility to use.
I don't particularly like Sony's claims about developers being lazy, etc. That is just Sony trying to shift the blame for a poor architecture decision, if you were a developer and had to choose which console to develop for, would you choose:
A. The console with 10m sales and easier to program for (which means shorter development time relative to B)
B. the Console with 4m sales and harder to program for (which means longer development time relative to A)
IMO, The only way that Sony is going to pull themselves into the lead (against the 360, nevermind the Wii) will be through some significant price cuts.
(tech info is summarised and covering general terms!)