If the tablet is any good then expect that by the time the other two consoles get properly announced at next years E3 they'll also sport tablets as well. If the tablet doesn't prove to be worth it then the other consoles won't have the expense of bundling it. I don't think they're going to pull another Cell and wait about four years after release to even prove the expense was even marginally worth it, and it really has to catch on straight away. Nintendo's advantage in previous generation sales can only evaporate as time goes by.
The console is a good offering but I have two main issues. It'd have been better released in 2011 and none of the technology involved wasn't invented in good time before the end of last year, that would have actually put some sweat on the other two console makers foreheads as they'd have had to decided whether to risk releasing on the 40nm node or wait two years between releases. It would have also capitalised on the Wii momentum a lot better.
The other issue is that the two other console manufacturers are able to release much higher performance hardware which matches or beats the Wii U in every respect and at a similar price. I don't personally see a $100 difference in cost as a gulf if the other console is able to justify the difference. People pay too much attention to list prices and forget that consoles are bought with games and accessories. The Wii + Wii Play was two games, two controllers for $300, $350 with Mario Kart etc, whereas the cheapest you could configure an equivalent HD console for in 2006 was IIRC ~$500-560 for a 20GB Xbox 360 with two controllers and one or two games..
Tease.
