It's a one-year headstart no matter which way you slice it, which we all so easily forget is the only reason the 360's still ahead of PS3 (given that Kinect proved to only be a short-term thing)

Obviously it's up to Nintendo to capitalize on this further, but i really don't know why all of a sudden a year's head-start is a bad thing, or a "narrow" window.

In other news of "shit the analysts say," Nintendo is now being unfavorably compared to RIM because Nintendo only has a 28% premium on their holdings while RIM has 72% excess value.

Nintendo is DOOM.

The moon will fall in 3 days and no one will buy a WII-U after that.

@ninetailschris: You mean no one CAN buy a WiiU after that.

You are right about how bad the PS3 was in its first year, but X360 had Call of duty 2 at Launch and Gears of war before the console completed its first year in the market.

Microsoft did everything right during 2006-2007.

I normally disagree with everything analysts say, but I have to agree with him that Nintendo strategy is bad.

I really think Nintendo should have released Wii U during fall 2011.

I agree with the analyst. Nintendo has a hard journey ahead of them. It really depends on Microsoft and Sony though. If Microsoft and Sony aren't going to be launching with old ports the way the Wii U is, then it's going to be challenging for Nintendo. I still feel Nintendo should have tried to shift some money to third parties and get something unannounced in. But no one can see the future, so we'll just have to wait.

I'm staying out of this topic because I don't know how to feel one way or the other.

"3DS has a narrow opportunity due to Sony's imminent reveal of their next gen portable!"´

New next gen console to the market first
Strong first party support
relatively strong 3rd party support
wavering support from EA
unique online interface
new consoles from competitors are shown/come to market

Gone off the market within 3.5 years

Its almost as if Sega Dreamcast and the Wii U are interchangeable; the last statement is yet to be seen of course but its not the course you want to be on.

Nintendo has to make sure they capture a lot of mind share with the time they have (with the help of 3rd parties, even though most Nintendo enthusiast despise them) or risk being marginal like the n64 and gamecube.

Unlike the PS2 where it was relatively easy to break its gaming population into difference factions, its going to be harder to do that with the x360 and ps3.

Here's the deal. If Sega had had cash on hand to keep Dreamcast alive, it would have done well. Certainly sold at least 50% more than either the GameCube or Xbox, and likely would have stunted PS2's success somewhat (simply by virtue of being a platform with momentum), could have gone as high as 40 million units given the rate they were working. Really, the Dreamcast was quite successful for where it was at the market at the time. The PS2's early success was merely part of the bad outlook that convinced Sega to pull the plug.

Plus it's not like wavering support from EA has hurt Nintendo in the past.

If Sega had the cash, the Dreamcast still would have flopped, the system was structurally doom to failed.  The age of piracy from the late 90s onward would have forced Sega in a new direction.

I am still trying to wonder who the Wii U is exactly targeted at.  If they are trying to get the core and the casual, Electronic Arts has to play a pivotal role in securing the hardcore gaming fan who buys 10 million+ copies of FIFA, 6 million maddens etc, it cannot weaver.  Without them or continued major 3rd party support, then half of the Wii U stragedy fails.