IDK, I tend not to question Nintendo and RAM, since the N64 it's never been the bottleneck or weak point in any sense. There's something to be said for creating well balanced and optimized hardware rather than slapping OTS parts in your box and calling it a console. iPhones routinely destroy other phones with twice as much or more processing grunt and system RAM. It's all about smart hardware design and really well optimized software, which Nintendo have always done well, and now Nvidia has a part in building their entire hardware and software ecosystem.
I disagree with this 100%
Nintendo gets away with less RAM because they've been behind in graphical output for the last several generations. If this things renders at 720p and just upscales to 1080p no matter what, of course it doesn't need as much ram as a PS4! But I wouldn't spin that as balance, I mean it is because it'd be obscene to throw 8GB of ram into something weaker than a PS4, but it's not
really "balance" because in reality it's not that they've found some clever way of doing with 4GB of RAM what their competitors need 8GB to do, they're just not capable of doing what their competitors can do period.
I wanted to object to your iPhone argument regarding how it's different coding in an environment versus the more lower level coding you can do for consoles but I'm not sure that argument's apt anymore. I still think it's a silly argument though, Apple only has to tune their software for a handful of devices, Android runs on everything, so yes, there's some smart engineering and coding going on there, but it's not like Sony and Microsoft have fragmented consoles either, neither would be a good example to relate to Google in that example. Really, all three console makers would be Apple in your scenario.
Regardless, the second it was a hybrid the die was cast, battery life, size and weight all became a clear priority and matching the PS4 and XB1 was pretty much impossible.
Loading assets to internal storage is a way to alleviate slow disc drive speeds isn't it?
Yes and no. Basically, it's whatever they need it to be. If files are compressed then it's a way to put more data on the disc than otherwise would have fit. Without knowing the size of the cart I can't say whether this will be an issue or not. Cost's an important factor with cart storage so we'll see. But a developer can use the disc to uncompress compressed data that otherwise wouldn't have fit, use it to offset loading times or both. There's also nothing stopping someone from filling up a cartridge and uncompressing stuff to local storage on the Switch, aside from the anemic 32GB storage. But it'll all come down to the size of the carts whether that's necessary or even relevant. The one nice thing however is that with a cartridge you don't need to worry about speed unlike a disc drive. So speed isn't an issue, only issue is size for the Switch.
