The PlayStation 2 provided backward compatibility with the PS1 by essentially incorporating an entire PS1 on a separate chip. It kept this arrangement permanently.
The PS3 started off providing backward compatibility the PS2 by the same method. However, the cost-reduced slim PS3 in 2009, dropped this feature.
This difference has been nagging at me for a long time. To be clear, either pattern – keeping the backward compatibility chip permanently, or dropping it after a few years – can be justified. What I'm still curious about is the reason for the difference. Whatever the reason for one behavior, why was it different in the other case?
I was reminded of this when I stumbled across an old discussion on the matter: https://web.archive.org/web/20090228051852/http://playstation.joystiq.com/2007/02/08/playstation-3-manufacturing-costs-to-go-down-way-down
The removal of EE+GS would probably be 50 bucks
Now that's just someone guessing, and surely he must be way over the mark. EE+GS were first released in 2000. This is 2009 we are talking about. The combined chip cannot possibly cost $50. I am very surprised that it was enough to be considered worth dropping. I would expect by that point it could just be fused with something else.
Just how much did the combined EE+GS chip cost, just before it was discontinued?