It isn't. While it's a number of limitation that you don't care about, the existence of those limitations and the profit/loss from the all single points of failures isn't a question of preference. You can't "prefer" and unwieldy external power supply, you can't "prefer" a higher failure rate. You can't "prefer" a huge console that has a vertical hot air outlet preventing stacking. You sure can decide it doesn't affect you, or that you were lucky your 360 didn't fail, but we're getting very far from business decisions.I'm not actually sure what the size of something I never move matters. But I guess that's personal preference. I don't own a ps4 right now but my friend does . The ps4 is noiser than the xbox one but at the same time they are both so quite it doesn't matter.
My one replaced a bluray player and an xbox 360. So its actually freed up room !
Reliability/Unreliability have costs associated. When designing a product, each part has an estimated failure rate. Some of them are designed by the console manufacturer, some are using untested modern processes, so they are high-risk. The failure rate is very difficult to estimate and can be missed because of a lack of competence in the field (see the 360 RROD, scratched discs, power supply failure). Sometimes you make more money despite the lower reliability, sometimes you don't. Having a product released on-time can be more profitable than the cost of warranty replacement and reputation loss. Business is like poker, you have to play the odds. The potential profit must be above than the estimated risk factor.
to quote Fight Club:
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.