Good news but not unexpected at all.

GRO will be a digital download for Wii U at launch.

And  Nintendo seems to be making 3rd party DD services available on the console, so I'd say full digital downloads will be available on the console like they said.

Iwata said Nintendo would never charge for online, so I'd say no.

I wonder how big the 3DS update will be.

After reading that link you posted, a question emerged: Will Nintendo still use the Nintendo Points for on-line purchases or will they abandon it and use $/€/ ¥?

Well Wii U controller has an NFC (Near Field Communication) feature, so they could use that maybe.

We'll know for sure at E3.

You seem to use the idea that Nintendo spent time and money on R&D to show that they weren't just copying the Vertrex while Sony was copying them, but I'm curious if you have any actual proof that Sony spent significantly less money on R&D to get the dual analog to work on their controller than Nintendo did to get it to work on the N64.  Just because you see something working doesn't mean you can copy it without any kind of effort now.  You see planes flying but if I asked you to build one in your backyard from scratch I'm sure it would take you quite a bit of R&D to get one going.  

Therefore if the whole argument is that Sony copied (not just a natural progression of controllers) because they put less effort into it's development, I'd like to see some proof. 

I'd argue that just like Nintendo getting their collective heads out of their asses when it comes to online is natual progression because they see it working very well for their competitors, and see it as an improvement that they should get on, dual analogs was done because they saw that people liked the N64 controller, or MS and Sony looking into motion controllers because people like the Wii.  Seeing what your competitors are successfully doing and giving it a shot yourself is just the way business works, and there is no difference between what Sony did with dual analog and what Nintendo is doing with the Nintendo Network (I realise that they had these capabilities before, but they are obviously focusing on online more because it has shown itself to be important largely thanks to the heavy investment by MS and partiallly Sony)

it's a burden I can't carry, that burden of proof. It's something most of us presume due to lack of insider information on the matter. The term used is called reverse engineering, and it's a sound preconception to think Sony's ability to reverse engineer the N64 controller helped to radically cut R&D costs. It's not really necessary for me to provide proof since this kind of logical step is typical in the industry, and reverse engineering is a common discipline in the tech industry. Much easier to run off existing tech than running off nothing if you know what I mean. Example: digital cameras. Once one manufacturer came up with it, everyone else was reverse engineering and next thing you know, all offered digital cameras.

@italics. It was but one of many other important points to show that Nintendo brought the thumbstick to gaming as is. The vectrex, if it was to be used with your thumb, is still very shady imho.

I think the main difference between online and the thumbstick innovation is that, for online, Sega was actually the first that gen to come up with it, and Nintendo actually had some revolutionary ideas back in the NES days which didn't take flight. It's not that Ninty lacked the ideas, it's more that they lacked the business vision when they flat out refused to make it "really" happen in the cube days. It wasn't a lack of innovation, but a lack of business vision. They already had the ideas in the NES days, so that wasn't the problem. The issue with Nintendo lagging so far behind in terms of online goes back to resentment of past failures and lack of faith in the web strategy at the time of the DC/GC. In contrast, had Nintendo not come up with the N64 controller, the idea to refuse it did not even cross Sony's mind prior to Nintendo's announcement, and that's because they didn't even have the idea in mind. Just my point of view.

"If the PS1 didn't make use of pressure sensitivity in its games"

...so you're making an assumption... ok just checking because honestly i can't remember if it did but i'd be inclined to think that it did

"1) it was a waste of harware tech which Sony provided in the dualshock, and 2) it is a considerable downgrade from Nintendo's offering software-wise."

thats your opinion, furthermore i'd consider the dual analog controls far more important for the ease of use they gave to camera control and other functions

the n64 didn't have that and nintendo's inclusion of dual analogs later gives credence to the fact that it was a significant step forwards

"This defeats your improving on what Nintendo offers and bringing to the masses argument."

i never ever made that argument because for me nintendo, sony and microsoft have just been improving on designs that were present previously

"More games were sold for N64 with the full analog experience than the few games that may have offered that experience on PS1"

the full analog experience? how do you get that without dual analogs? and if it was why did nintendo add another analog afterwards?

and furthermore i'd be inclined to think that the ps1 sold more games with analog control than the n64 hence me saying that it brought analogs mainstream to a greater extent

"They certainly get my vote for innovator and populariser."

your opinion, i'd say all of the current three added their own innovations but initially the ps1 drove its popularity more due to its sales