The PS2's enormous lead over the competition had its benefits.
For one, compatibility. Back then, if your friends played console games, they probably had a PS2, and if you met a new person who played games, you could be reasonably sure they had one too. PS3 gamers this generation didn't have that luxury for a long time.
Generally, I think the downsides of unilateral dominance outweigh the upsides at both macro (console) and micro levels (e.g. EA having an exclusive hold on NFL games).
I hope Sony is rewarded for their good decisions this time around, just as I was pleased to see them suffer market setbacks after rolling out an expensive, developer-antagonistic console with the PS3.
Similarly, MS deserves to take their lumps for any of their ill-advised decisions. It's not about taking sides or brand partisanship or any of that nonsense, it's simply good for the adaptive evolution of the industry.
In that light, these numbers aren't surprising. Among the general Joe Blow public, I actually think MS will do quite well in the States, but the hardcore early adopters should give Sony a definitive edge in the early going (maybe 60-40?).
It will be fun to watch it play out. I'll do a shitty job of practicing what I preached above, because I fully intend to buy both consoles at launch. I *should* punish MS for shoving Kinect down our throats alongside an underpowered console, but they have games I want to play (yes, I suck).