While I think it may be novel enough to reinvigorate general "mainstream" interest in Nintendo as a game company, I'm definitely not convinced of the utility of the waggle. My fear is, it's going to end-up being a seldom-used-well-but-frequently-shoehorned gimmick like the touchscreen on the DS, that ultimately I could do without. Especially if doing without came with the benefit of an overall more powerful console. Even so, it's cheap (I just bought a pair of boots more expensive), I'm an enormous Zelda fan, and there are some other Nintendo franchises I like, so I have a Wii preordered.
I also don't think Drinky has played the Wii.
That address is: "APF, Brooklyn NY ..."
To be perfectly honest, I'm largely pro-Wii because I dread expensive, extremely high tech systems and their effects on game development. I've no desire to see the industry ride on that side of the technology curve, it's too expensive, and not just for consumers. Cheaper development is a barrier to corporate controlled design. Live Arcade type environments are another answer. I'd love it if that took off in a bigger way.
Having said that, the controller is mostly a mechanism for Nintendo to justify playing a different tech game.
It is effective, the first thing I did with it was input my name on a virtual keyboard, and with no experience handling the controller, accuracy and speed were no problem. As a mouse in space it works swimmingly, so some games will doubtlessly handle the wiimote elegantly, but I'm sure most cash-ins will be pretty gimicky. I can live with that, I don't buy most games.
And lots of people have played a decent bit of Wii, Drinky's probably telling the truth. Doesn't change the fact that I disagree with him (about so many things). His opinion is certainly in the minority of those that have played Wii.
edit: but of course I'll doubt you too if you'll get me a free Excite Truck (which I'm definitely not buying)