Poor guy.  No idea what he's up against.......

First off, Sega introduced pay to play on consoles.  Ever hear of Sega Net?  It was for the Dreamcast and it was more expensive than XBL.  M$ used its own expensive HDD but it also came packed with the system for those that wanted one.  It also supports memory cards, external HDDs via USB (Only 16 GB or something, though) and other peripherals.  If memory serves, Sony sold a $99 HDD last gen when all Xbox systems had them for free....and then they released the Slimline PS2 that didn't even support the device.  You speak of hardware reliability but I personally owned two Playstations because the black thingy that held my discs just fell the fuck off for no apparent reason. I owned three Playstation 2's because the first one quit reading discs period.  The second one had disc reading problems and when I opened it to perform a quick fix that I saw on youtube, I broke it.  I owned three Xbox 360's because the first one quit reading discs and then it got the RRoD.  I sold it.  My second one still works.  It's "Kinect-ed" to my TV in the living room.  My second one still works.  It's a 360s in my gaming room and it shares a shelf with my Wii, PC, and PS3.  Sony has hurt me more with their reliability than Microsoft. 

Is Nintendo better for the gaming world?  Remember (you probably don't) when they used to bully third parties?  They used to make them purchase expensive cartridges only from Nintendo and they had to buy a certain number.  If their game was shit, they spent too much on carts.  If their game was awesome, they didn't buy enough carts so they lost out on sales.  Remember how Nintendo wouldn't let companies release more than a certain number of games in a year?  That's why Konami had to create a second company called Ultra Games in the 80's so that they could actually release Metal Gear in the US.  Remember how, if Nintendo was going to releas a game of a certain genre, nobody was allowed to release a game in a competing genre for a certain amount of time?  And yet, Nintendo is good for gaming.  In fact, they're actually gaming's savior after the gaming crash in the early 80's.

Is Sony good for gaming?  Remember how they said consumers would "Get a second job" to pay for the $600 PS3?  Remember how they took features like backwards compatibility from the PS3?  How they refused to allow several 2D games to ever be released on the PS1?  How they made sure that several games were exclusive to their platform and wouldn't allow them to go to Saturn/Xbox during the PS1/PS2 days until MUCH later (GTA)?  The previously mentioned horrifically defective PS1/PS2 consoles ( I remember somewhere (consumer affair or some business association, can't remember) said if a hardware company makes product that has a higher failure rate than 10%, then said company has to cease production!! --sound familiar?)?  And yet, Sony is good for gaming.  In fact, they're actually responsible for gaming going "mainstream" and becoming a more mature form of entertainment.

So Microsoft brings DLC to consoles.  Downloadable games like XBLA, Netflix (almost a year before it came to Wii and PS3--without a disc*), Indie games, Achievements, an amazing web infrastructure that its competitors feed off of, video chat, movies/TV shows that can be purchased, and more.  Features that have become almost standard since Microsoft brought them to market first.  Features that you probably enjoy on your PS3 without a second thought where they originated.....and you question whether Microsoft and its "rivalry" with Sony is good for gaming?  Your PS3 wouldn't exist in its current form if it wasn't for the Xbox 360.  And vice versa.  Microsoft is good for gaming.

Let that soak into your pores.  It's good for the complexion.

*I know Microsoft had a deal with Netflix.  That's why Nintendo/Sony had to use discs (I still have the discs!).  It was their way of getting around Microsoft's exclusivity deal.  Still, Microsoft tested the waters and made Netflix a huge success until Netflix screwed it all up by almost doubling their prices.

Well, to be honest, I think Nintendo really fell short of its potential success with the Wii. As awesome as it did, it could have done so much better, as much as a market leader should. I really believe the main reason for that shortcoming is due to its inability to render at least a baseline level of advanced graphics, that simple extra feature making it the goto platform of the generation (above and beyond the casual strategy). Then people would have multiple Wiis in their homes, sales would have exploded imho. But, we weren't there to see it, so noone can know for sure

Again, from a business perspective.

I wouldn't really think it would make a difference. HD would have increased the price of the Wii as well as the production costs, they would sell less and make less money on each system sold, and I doubt the people who would have bought the Wii for HD would have made much difference. I also think that the PS3 and Xbox 360 multiplats would have made their way onto the Wii and ruined its reputation as a family friendly console. Still, I do wonder how Nintendo would have done if the Wii had similar power to the HD twins.

What nonsense , MS had no hand in the PS3's GPU , the DX argument is irrelevant , for many reasons one being PS3 uses Open GL , that according to nvidia's developer site is the worlds most used api , plus if you used your argument you could say Sony was responsible for the 360's CPU seeing IBM used a variant of the cell architecture to produce its cores , the truth of the matter is MS is responsible for their product , just has Sony is for theirs , I remember bill Gates talking about the success of the PS1 and how the market had grown  and video gaming at that time was well on the way to becoming the biggest thing in entertainment, and since MS was hamstrung with the way the  PC market worked in regards to hardware ownership , becoming a console manufacturer was the best way of getting some of that pie and  with their background , creating a PC in a box was a no brainer , yes they have had the good and bad since becoming a console maker and still haven't made up  completely all their losses from the original X box through , but that doesn't matter any more because that paid for them to now be  entrenched in the business , profitable with a good stable income stream through live, plus anyway  they will eventually see every dollar back and more .