...mirrorless is the future of Canon's camera business; more to the point, it's the future profit of Canon's camera business.
Is it? Mirrorless meant the 'death of the dSLR in five years'. That was seven years ago.
Depends on how you define "mirrorless." I define it the simple way: no mirror. The mirror will go away. When? I'm willing to speculate, but not predict, and it will be an evolution, not a sudden event. We've seen some great AF advances lately, and the battery life issue is just a matter of continued incremental progress.
Are you willing to assert that there will still be a large market in reflex cameras in twenty years?
You may have been trying to suggest that, even if mirroless is the future, profit is based on nearish future, not far future, and Canon could afford to delay M- development until it's closer. That would be a reasonable argument, but you didn't make it. Instead you argued that "people were wrong before about mirrorless, therefore..."
Depends on how you define "future." Canon has told us the future is video camera with a small, ultrahigh resolution sensor, a big zoom lens, phenomenal image stabilization, and frame grabs for still images. Of course, as a video camera it fits your definition of mirrorless…
Yes, the reflex mirror will go away at some point, some time after the point where performance of EVFs meets or exceeds that of OVFs (that's a ways off), and image sensor AF performance meets or exceeds that of a dedicated phase AF sensor for both static and moving subjects (we're getting closer to that). But today's common use of term "mirrorless" does not match your definition as simply 'having no mirror'. "Mirrorless" is generally taken as a shorthand descriptor for the class of cameras known as MILCs, compact system cameras, etc. If you're going to use a term in a way that differs from convention, it's helpful to provide your definition at the outset.
Sensor size will remain important, as will ergonomics. If you want to have a lens with a large aperture to cover a full frame sensor's image circle, you're going to need a physically large lens. Put a small camera behind that lens, the ergonomics are poor (ask anyone who's mounted an f/2.8 zoom on the EOS M). Cameras that are similar in size to today's dSLRs, but don't have a reflex mirror, will come along eventually. We won't be able to call them dSLRs (technically), but they won't fit today's definition of "mirrorless" either.
I can envision the future as high speed, high resolution cameras. The distinction between video and high burst "still" photography will disappear. Imagine 24, 30, 60 FPS at 25 MP. Is that video or still? does it matter? Do we need an optical view finder for this camera or EVF or simply a LCD screen at the back of the camera.
The rules of the game will be changing, just like digital changed the rules for film cameras.
The next 5-10 years will be very interesting and unfortunately expensive if you want to stay on the leading equipment edge. But you will be rewarded.
Okay, time for me to put away my crystal ball