Considering you're the one cherry picking numbers for some reason, it would seem the pot is calling the kettle. What am I trying to justify?
Back to the point, if we want to compare the cold boot exclusively, of course that's fine, and that's absolutely a valuable metric to have in understanding these systems. In the post you replied to, we weren't talking cold boot numbers. You just replied and pasted them in for seemingly no reason at all. But, to be fair, in the cold boot race, based on what we have, it seems Sony is the clear winner. Hats off, here's the bottle of bubbly, enjoy the celebration.
However, for a completely fair comparison, we also need to acknowledge that the cold boot race isn't the only one being ran. Cold boot isn't how people are going to be starting the majority of their games on the Series X and Series S. Microsoft have provided an OS feature called quick resume that allows me to get from the OS - or other games - into the game potentially faster than Sony's machine can cold boot. The feature is called quick resume and it's automatic - it just works as part of the console's operations. So, that comparison is just as valuable a metric as the cold boot - and, I'd argue more so for the real world use case discussions, because every Series X owner is going to be using it for every game after the first time they start it up.