Motion controls are actually alive and well on Switch 1 and 2, many of the biggest games on those consoles use them, from BOTW to Splatoon to Cyberpunk to Resident Evil.

What percentage of Switch games do you think use traditional button controls as the default vs nunchuck style? 

Most Splatoon players apparently use gyro IIRC, and it's also the default setting in games like BOTW, TOTK, Mario Odyssey, Donkey Kong Bananza, etc.

Which, case in point, is the most convenient, least obtrusive form of motion controls also seen in controllers like the SixAxis and DualSense. 

I wouldn't classify motion controls as a whole as "inconvenient" personally, there's a reason Wii Sports become a cultural phenomenon, for a lot of people moving the controller is actually more intuitive than sticks and such.

The OP seemed to frame "convenience" in this context as simply refining a proven concept that people are already used to and comfortable with rather than trying something new and risky; motion controls may have been new when the Wii came out, but by now I'd argue they're a fairly mature technology.

No necessarily, the dual analog controller design is far from the convenient one, wii mote was far easier to use. The controls are still a big hurdle to entry and have stagnated the console market. It's a plateau to be able to support shooters on the couch, yet most gamers are on mobile with easier controls. Same as the mouse is still the main input for PC. A refinement of the wii mote to use as a reliable moue while resting on your upper leg without uncomfortably twisting your wrist or having to hold your arms up would open up so much for console gaming.

Switch having to run on TV as well holds it back as a mobile platform, touchscreen is very convenient but very few games use it on Switch 2. WiiU was a great innovation but needed refinement, touchscreen controls in your hand, HUD free gaming on the TV.

That hardest part of innovation is overcoming what people are used to. Especially with control schemes that take a long time to get used to.

I'll take the product that provides the superior experience.

I don't care how innovative something is, if it doesn't deliver as much value as a more refined option then I'll look elsewhere until it catches up. If it can't then it was a fad and will fade away. If it's an actual improvement then it will be absorbed into the industry. I don't purchase products just to own them, I buy them because of what they can give me.

Neither option automatically translates to the best option. Execution is what matters.

Let’s say it’s an innovation that leaves you salivating at the thought of owning, but it has some drawbacks. For instance, Switch 1 and its hybrid nature left some “salivating” to get their hands on console gaming on-the-go for only $300USD, but drawback is 720p 30FPS Dark Souls.