developers are lazy, actually they just do one version PC version, that 360 can easily play, and then port in 3-6 months the same version to the ps3.

and bang in 1 year a game with pretty graphics.

certainly wii it's popular but when  u have 64 million userbase, when more than 50% it's people that don't care about your (FPS,TPS,Action,Platforming, Racing,fighting). they will try to sell to that demographic to that demography, especially since games like wii fit, wii sport resort, and EA versions sell soo much.

wii does have it fair share of people that enjoy those kind of games, but the amount of people buying games the other kind of games it's much larger.

or make a lazy port and try to sell to those 2 consoles that that most if not all, enjoy.

Yes, but they were better equipped to do so. N64's RAM was removable, but Wii would have to rely on such extensions via USB, and i'm not entirely sure if the bus speed on USB 2.0 is up to the task of streaming graphics in real-time, though i forget the internal speeds of the Wii's cards in the first place.

Even if the bandwidth issue could be solved, you're essentially asking for a new console (new CPU, GPU and RAM)... it would be way too expensive.

I dont think carts were much faster in the older days..ISA was the stnadard back then.. not sure what was the bandwidth there.. but im sure USB2.0 is comparable.

In any case why does the wii need such an add-on.. It can most defntly do something between EDTV-720p.
All you would need to do is change cables..

I dont really wanna play Gow on the wii but a sharper cleaner looking SMG would be nice...

Even today, most PC games have several levels of detail on models, textures and pixel shader effects; and they support of mutliple resolutions and multiple levels of anti aliasing and anisotropic filtering. There are no technical limitations of what I'm suggesting, the cost difference is fairly modest (most games produced this way would still be cheaper than HD focused games), and most consumers wouldn't care that much about the difference in quality.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting this approach for games that sell multi-millions of copies on each of the HD consoles; but the majority of HD console games would benefit from the lower cost development and larger market that this approach would bring.

"- External Processor

- External Video

- Extra ram in the external box (Probably 256MB)"

You have no idea how absurd this sounds right? an external processor? an external video ? i would like to see the Dev kit for wii after they implement an external processor, it will make programming the cell look like a kindergarden homework.

To be able to play HD games with the same quality(graphical detail, physics, etc) as the current HD consoles you would need an addon that could be a new console in it self and would use the original Wii as a dvd drive and A/V cable (in general as a I/O device).

The GPU has the fill rate to output an HD signal, but the framebuffer is only 3MB.  Hence the 480p cap.

I don't think the market for this would be big enough to warrent it.

Bingo!

But I stated all this in the original post.  Programming for it wouldn't be anymore difficult then programming for whatever processor and video card they put into the box.

Option 1 would be possible, but is a hack and not save much, maybe $50 off the cost of an entire new box, well maybe $100+ off the cost of Wii compatible mode. I could see it if they made a new box not backwards compatible, and this box.

USB just isn't fast enough for option 2 and have decent performance for games. It would introduce too much latency and saturate the USB.

Anyways, I say the likely hood of your two options combined is