How must could it have cost sony to add an IR receiver to the PS3 like every other device in the world for the last 50 years.

Really, not much. I was very surprised that one didn't make it onto the Slim.

I think it was not on the original for possibly two reasons

1) except for remote (which is not a real necessity for a console) it adds nothing

2) Sony early on was not stepping on any other BD players tows (waited to add DTS MA, BD-live...)

on the other hand since the original they got rid of features (some relatively important) trying to bring down the manufacturing cost (got rid of card readers, got rid of some of the USB ports, got rid of PS2 compatibility...) so I don't think they will ever add it. At first I wanted them to make an add-on, but there are many solutions now and I am used to using the controller.

I heard that Playstation is a losing propostion for Sony, so I don't expect them to spend to much on a feature that will not sell any more or less game systems.

Follow the money. Sony does sell a remote for the PS3. I'd imagine quite a large number of people have purchased said remote that wouldn't have if the PS3 had an IR receiver built-in.

This has nothing to do with cost. This is some engineer sitting in a lab who is completely out of touch with the rest of reality. "IR? It comes with a bluetooth remote.. how freaking cool is that? You don't need IR!"

Unless of course you want to use the device as a BD player without having multiple remotes in your lap.

I am surprised the slim didn't get it also.

Yeah, the cost for something like this is essentially negligible - certainly not worth the omission for the loss of general usability. Originally I saw this as a way of not excessively undercutting Sony Electronic's standalone player sales, but by the time the Slim came along there was no reason to do that.

I do agree. A silly reply on my part. Was certainly an "out of touch with reality move" on Sony's part.