[quote name='darkcecil32']I wonder if Sony will re-release true backwards compatibility toward the end of the ps3's life line when development costs should hopefully be relatively low compared to what they are now...I think it was pretty cheap they took it out completely for the 40 gig...software emulation can't be that costly, can it? What's going to suck is when they run out of the refurbed 60 gigs and start giving 80's back in exchange. I rue the day that happens.[/QUOTE]Well, they reason there's no PS2 BC in the 40GB is because there is no EE (PS2 CPU) and no GS (PS2 Graphics chip). The 80GB PS3 only removes the EE, but still needs the GS. The reason Sony released the 40GB is because many complained about the high PS3 pricetag and wanted a console around the same price range as the 360. Some think blu-ray is the reason PS3 is expensive, but that's a huge myth (It actually costs Sony very little to add it). Removing card readers, decreasing the HDD, and removing two USB ports don't exactly add up to $100 (more like $50 less at the most), so the only other feature of the PS3 that could easily go was PS2 components (because they roughly costs around $40-$50 without the EE). Now, the original 20GB/60GB models were WAY too costly to make (Sony only released them at launch because the software emulated EE was not ready at launch) and were to blame for Sony's massive loses early on (A PS3 would sold lose them $240-$300). Those two SKUs will never come back, regardless. It's like the cost of PS2 components isn't exactly dropping much in the near future, and when you continue including the full PS2 hardware BC, that keeps PS3 further away from the competition's price point. The ONLY possible way right now for Sony to have full hardware BC is for them to sell a console for $550-$600, but people before showed their anger towards that price point, so it isn't coming back. Along with the 40GB doing pretty well right now (and the 80GB did fine), we definitely won't see them again.
In the U.S., the ONLY way Sony will run out of 60GB consoles as replacements is if there is a mass breakage AND everyones PS3 console is impossible to fix (all they do is repair a console and put it in the refurbished pile, most PS3 problems can be fixed). Also, the 80GB will indeed continue to get better (and it's PS2 compatability is still pretty high), so even if people get it back in the future, it will still probably play most all their PS2 games (and people keep forgetting the 20GB/60GB BC isn't perfect either since there are games that have many issues with it).
I will say, there is a good chance PS2 software emulation will come to the 40GB towards the end of the PS3 main lifecycle; however, at the moment it's not technically possible to work with the Cell/RSX in getting near perfect PS2 BC (achieving near 100% PS2 BC, more like 10% at the moment with the PS2 emulators out. The PS2 hardware is very complicated to emulate and only the most powerful PCs can somewhat handle it). Eventually it will happen, just not right now (Sony has hired people to work on PS2 emulation within Japan). Once there is full PS2 emulation (not needing both the GS and EE), it will cost Sony $0 to add it (The reason the 40GB plays PS1 games is because it costs $0 to implement).