Microsoft.
Taking an objective measure of which company got the biggest bang for their buck out of E3 (discounting that MS probably spent way more bucks than the other 2; Cirque du Soleil can't have been cheap to hire) I believe Microsoft did the best. Sony is the loser by a small margin.
What was my objective measure? Google News.
I did a simple search of Google News "E3 2010 Microsoft", then "E3 2010 Nintendo", then "E3 2010 Sony". The results of those searches are:
Microsoft: 4813 news hist
Nintendo: 4305news hits
Sony: 4268 news hits
Kinect wins E3 over 3DS and Playstation Move in terms of generating the most news media coverage. I suggest the real winner of any conference such as E3 is the company that gets the most mainstream news coverage, not the one who the industry pundits and forum dwellers think put on the best show / had the most killer games / was hardcore enough / has the best tech / had the hottest booth babes.
Yes, this is only a quantitative measurement, it doesn't measure the quality of what's in the news media about each company atE3 and their respective new hardware they showed off. It's possible that MS has proportionally more negative news articles than the other 2 given some of the reactions from people on this forum, but even so I doubt it's as much to wipe out the >500 hit lead MS has over Nintendo.
So there you have it, a totally objective measure of who won E3. Do you have a better objective measure (gaming forum polls are not particularly objective)? If so does it yeild a different result?
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix