Several million customers of Super Mario Galaxy, Zelda and Metroid disagree. Those are games noone new to consoles would buy IMHO.
This is at best your own opinion. At worst it is just plain wrong. The reason is simple - those are franchises that have been owned and produced on Nintendo consoles.
The type of sale you are refering too here entirely consists of people buying sequals. People who owned the PS2 would be irrelevant to this discussion. Instead you would be referring to people who owned the earlier versions of Nintendo hardware. Indeed, most of those probably did go with the Wii. Given the state of Nintendo's last released console, brand loyalty would have been very important to people who stuck it through with the gamecube.
Moreover, given the small number of games that were available on the Wii, it stands to reason that people buying the console have to buy something. Do you suppose they would refuse to buy these games? There is no reason behind that assumption.
At best you could claim that those sales were made up of older Nintendo fans who had purchased a PS2 and were now going back to the Nintendo after a full generation. Even then, look at the install bases of the original Nintendo. The N64 sold around 32 million units. That is no where near the number of people needed to support the current sales rate of current consoles - especially the Wii.
I have a feeling that millions of people who bought Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid, and Zelda would agree with me entirely.
Which is why the Wii is not at 30-40 million units now. But it is selling to the PS2 user base as well, you can be sure about that. 20 million people won't be converted to gaming within a year.
Converted to gaming is the wrong term. If you check anywhere from 40% (Washington Post) to 63% (NPD) of the US population plays video games. There are 300 million people in the US with an average household size of 2.6 last I checked. That means there are around 115 million households in the US, with anywhere from 46 to 72 million households that are already playing some form of computer games. Last I checked, only around 40% of US households own consoles. That means there are around 30 million households in the US who play computer games who do not own a console.
So that means the Wii by aiming for households who did not own consoles was aiming at a market that has nearly 69 million people in it who did not have a PS2 - 30 million of which already played video games. Yes, there will be some overlap as well. However like I have said before everything I have seen does not support the fact that the PS2 userbase is going over to the Wii in droves. As a matter of fact it is just the opposite. PS2 sales remain strong. PS3 and XBox sales look similar to uptake of previous consoles. If the Wii was competing for the same market, it wouldn't be selling at all according to those numbers.
So the only explanation left as to why it is selling so well is its extended market appeal. Don't laugh that off or try to explain it away. It is the strongest thing the Wii has going for it right now. It does not lessen the Wii's success at all, quite the opposite as a matter of fact. The fact that the Wii has managed to broaden the market is a good thing. The days of video gamers being a few teenage men slumped over a glowing green monitor in their basement are over.
There are - at least last time I've checked - less BR movies sold then the size of the PS3 user base. And for each AV enthusiast buying multiple movies, there are several times as many who have none, if you do the math.
For example, with the attach ratio around 1, for every user with 5 movies there are 5 users with no movies at all. And 5 Bluray discs aren't such a big collection...
People just don't care about BR, people can't download movies for the PS3, people don't buy the console in large crowds either. To me, that's "people don't care" in short. You can repeat Sony's PR here, but it still won't become true...
Irrelevant entirely to what I said.
Let me explain though as you seem to have missed the point. Last year, a multitude of people ran around claiming that HD DVD was winning because it was selling more stand alone players. As a matter of fact, HD DVD sold more stand alone players throughout most of last year. Blu Ray only caught up in the last couple of months.
However, Blu Ray sold discs at a rate of 2:1 up to 4:1 at times. Now, you can try to throw arround attach ratios all you want, but the math is very very simple here:
People who own PS3s were buying Blu Rays.
End of story. Not only were they buying Blu Rays, but they were doing so at a rate far above what the other HD competition was able to produce. Attach ratio does not mean anything when it comes to Blu Rays. It does with video games, but for very different reasons. Lets review them just for good measure.
As late as November of last year, studies show that only around 25% of US households own HD televisions. Don't confuse HD with Digital - people who buy Blu Ray certainly don't. So, using the earlier numbers for households, there are only around 25 million households that own HD televisions and to whom Blu Ray or HD DVD could be important too. Last figures I saw, total HD DVD and stand alone Blu Ray players is reaching maybe 1.2 million. Of those, the lions share were stand alone HD DVD players at around 750,000 (once again, how are Blu Ray discs outselling HD DVD if no one cares about the Blu Ray in the PS3? Especially by such a large margin?). Include December sales and the PS3 total sales and you might get up to around 5 million total players sold.
So lets reveiw attach rate for households who can watch HD signals and those who have players. Lets see - about 1 in 5! What an amazing coincidence! Well, actually it isn't. As many analysts have stated the entire year, people are holding off on choosing an HD format right now because of confusion surrounding the format war. It isn't that they don't care, it is that they are waiting to see which format prevails. Even those who buy PS3s end up reluctant to start replacing their DVD collection with Blu Ray discs. Even a chance that such a costly endevour could leave them with a collection of unplayable discs is not worth the chance.
Also some things you claimed need to be clarified. Currently, the PS3 can indeed stream downloaded movies from a PC. It can also download its own if you have linux. What the PS3 does not currently support is bittorrent (hence no illegal downloads) and a few of the online download shops like netflix that require their own proprietary format. Sony and Microsoft are both working on getting digital movies available in their online stores. By the time download or streaming technologies become relevant to mass markets, both consoles will have the ability.
Like I said before, it is a gamble with technology. To just dismiss it as the wrong choice now is very short sighted. It would be the same for those who want to claim the Wii is just a fad and will fail. Both are building their intended markets and are on track. Why try so hard to prove that one is not?