The comparison to the opening months of Xbox 360 and PS3 is intended to demonstrate that although Wii U is struggling now, it has every opportunity to be successful in the future.

As to your point about comparing sales directly, that is a big mistake. The PS3 and Xbox 360 have huge install bases and they are much more attractive to consumers because of the large library of software. PS3 and Xbox 360 are still being supported and will continue to be supported after PS4 and the next Microsoft console launch.

The most equitable comparison will be Wii U vs. PS4 vs. Xbox 3. And I have a strong feeling that all three will have to compete ferociously against Xbox 360 and PS3.

I understand why people make the comparison but its flawed as the market then and now are completely different. If the economic climate was identical as well as the attitude towards tech, the comparison would make sense, but thats not the case.

Ah but that's not a mistake - that's the reality of the Wii U's competition. The Wii U unfortunately needs to show itself as a successor, not equal, to the existing consoles, otherwise it's competition will not be the PS4, but the PS3, due to the target audience. Though what will be interesting as you say is how will the other next-gen consoles compare in terms of sales. I have a feeling that the PS4 will probably do the best if the nextbox is going down a home-media route. 

Without Nintendo as a hardware developer, where would Sony get all of its ideas from?
They would only have boring vanilla Microsoft.

If you look at history it has been Nintendo that has continually innovated the industry. The NES was an innovation. The original Playstation (I realize Sony was a partner) was a Nintendo idea. Mario 64 was a Nintendo innovation. The Wii and the Wii U are both Nintendo innovations. What exactly has Sony or Microsoft innovated in the gaming industry? Not to say that those two companies do not have the ability and R&D to bring innovation to the table, but they have yet to do so.

Ironic, since you seem to be quite happy to compare the Wii U to the 360 and PS3, thus showing that YOU don't understand business.

Comparing Wii U sales with Vita sales makes a lot more sense than comparing Wii U sales with current 360 and PS3 sales. They released around the same time (within a year of each other), with similar pricing and a lot of similar functionality (touchscreen as primary interface, dual analog with traditional SNES-layout buttons, triggers, camera, and motion controls). The only other even remotely reasonable comparison is with the Xbox 360 in 2005 and early 2006, when it was in a similar situation of being the first system off the blocks, getting a lot of up-ports from previous-gen consoles, and was an expensive system when all of the other available systems were quite cheap.

While the Wii U isn't selling as well as the 360 did in early 2006, most of that can be chalked up to the lack of games releasing for the Wii U. In this way, comparison with Vita is even more sensible, because it also has a problem with game releases, hence why there was something like a 5x boost to sales in Japan in the most recent sales data due to just one notable game releasing on the Vita.

The fact of the matter is, in a business sense, the Wii U isn't really competing against the PS3 and 360 any more than it's competing against the PSVita. It's a new console and will be competing with the PS4 and the Xbox Successor, whatever it ends up being called. This is a fact irrespective of power comparisons, etc.

Anyway, my point here is that you shouldn't call someone out for lack of business understanding when your assertion is itself nonsensical in a business sense.

And to bring it back to the topic, I'm going to reiterate that if Nintendo became software only, it would be devastating to the long-term health of the videogame industry. They are effectively the beta-testers for new technologies in gaming. They don't always succeed (Virtual Boy), and they don't always make it out of R&D (Vitality Sensor), but if they weren't in the hardware race, there'd be no dual analog, no force feedback, no touch controls, no motion controls. Wireless controllers would be just starting to become common. Indeed, if not for Nintendo, there'd be no PlayStation, as CharmedontheWB points out. Gaming would also be exclusively for boys and young men, with FPSes being the vastly most common game sold, and it would still lack any mainstream appeal.

In fact, I'd assert that, without Nintendo, gaming would have lost to smartphones, etc, about 4 years ago - let's admit it, Sony has yet to show even an inkling of ability to adapt to the changing market, with each console really just being a beefed-up version of the previous one, and MS have yet to show themselves to be any different, although the direction they take their next console may show otherwise. Either way, though, MS clearly didn't adapt with the 360 - if they'd had Kinect with it at launch, perhaps it might have been different, but there's little doubt that MS was reacting to the Wii's success by releasing Kinect.

It's the other way around.

It would be better for the gamers if the others went software only, because then you could have innovative Nintendo hardware, Nintendo games, and third party games on one system.

No - Just release strong hardware that can compete with Sony and Microsoft.
Yeah release a console that can barely considered be on par with the PS3 shortly before the PS4 and NextBox aka consoles that are on par with current HighEnd PCs come out.
3rd Party wouldn't ignore Nintendo if their system would be comparable to others in terms of power.
We have seen the jump from an Alpha Build that isn't using more than 2GB RAM of the new console over the PS3 and they really want to compete with that and justify their decision?
When the Gen Transition Games are gone and Devs start to use the potential of PS4/NextBox we will see even bigger jumps.

Considering the Wii U is pushing the same games as the 360 and PS3, why not compare them? The vita is a handheld offering completely different games....Why not chuck in the iPhone to that mix if you want to compare the Wii U to the Vita?

In a buisness sense the wii u IS competing with the 360/PS3 as the target audience is almost identical. Offer the same gamaes & guess what, you are going after the same audience. How you think the Wii U is going to compete against the PS4 after seeing things like Shadow Fall is beyond me.

Third parties have ignored power-parity Nintendo hardware in the past. However. Third parties are determined to ignore Nintendo no matter how self-destructive it is.

No. Why do these threads continue to come up?

Oh right. Because fanboys who "hate Nintendo" secretly wish/desire be able to PLAY top quality Nintendo games on their Xboxes..........gotcha. Not gonna happen folks. Move along.