If we talking style over substance, lets not even talk about the physical aesthetics of el Sony Deathstar 3 . . . .
You trust Sony more than Microsoft? While a tough one I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you there. After last years DRM debacle, this years battery debacle, the fact that Sony electronics has lost marketshare by the bucketload, their shares are 3 clips from being rated 'junk', are you so sure? From the company that tries to lock you into proprietory everything at every opportunity they can? Their only "successful" brand at the moment are their Bravia's, which are actually Samsung devices.
Lets talk differentiators shall we? As a games console what sets Sony apart from the 360? Uh, not much actually. It's got a Uber DVD player to store more HD content, hmm, right? Unfortunately the RSX GPU only has access to half the texture memory of the 360, so uh, you're just going to get a lot more of less. Actually, that's Sony's whole strategy by the looks of things.
Forget the tilt rubbish. As MS said, they tried it 7 years ago already and no-one wanted it. The 360 controller is decades ahead of the PS3 controller (No seriously it is!

wanna borrow my PS1 pad? )
. . And forget the marketing hype. In all honesty when it comes down to the two machines as games consoles they stand toe to toe, as we can already see the games are typically identical. (see COD3) What it'll come down to is content, and unfortunately for the SFB, 360's got this one covered, by a country mile.
The unfortunate truth though is that people will buy the PS3, just because that is what it is. the next version of what they know, with buckets of marketing moeny behind it. Just like Intel versus AMD.