Nintendo Reportedly Plans Smaller and Cheaper Switch For This Year (engadget.com)

According to a report from Nikkei, Nintendo is developing a smaller and cheaper version of the Switch focused on portability, and without some of the features in the original console. "A rumor in October suggested Nintendo was developing a new Switch, but instead of improving on the existing model, it's just as likely the company is looking for ways to streamline the system," notes Engadget. From the report: As Ars Technica speculates, the console's plastic dock could be the first thing to go. It's available separately for $90, and there are also cheaper ways to get your Switch to output to a TV (it's relying on a USB-C connection, after all). Nintendo could conceivably move towards a smaller and cheaper screen, and potentially even make the controller a physical part of the console, instead of the removable Joy-Cons. It also wouldn't be out of character for Nintendo to break existing functionality with a console revamp -- the 2DS was a cheaper spin on the 3DS that was still very playable without 3D.

Comments

Servicing batteries

[sjbe]

They owe us one where the batteries can be replaced.

They owe you nothing. They are offering a product for sale. If you like it, buy it. If you don't, don't. Either choice is fine. I like user replaceable batteries too but I'm under no illusion that companies are under any obligation to provide them. I have declined to purchase products where I felt that servicing them would be a problem in the future. Nothing Nintendo makes is a life necessity so don't buy it if it doesn't meet your quality and durability standards.

Things like video game consoles are precisely the sort of thing where the government should be outlawing planned obsolescence in the form of non-fixable batteries.

"Planned obsolescence"? They don't have to plan it. It's going to be obsolete in 2-4 years with no planning whatsoever. That's just how fast the market moves. Now if your argument was that by making devices that cannot be serviced they are making unnecessary landfill then I think you might have a reasonable argument. Having a device fail because the battery went dead and cannot be replaced (by user or by manufacturer) is something that is a real problem.

"Send it in and we'll replace the battery or unit" should not be permissible on consumer electronics.

If you don't like it don't buy it. I think your complaint is a perfectly legitimate reason to not buy it. But if you fork over the cash for it then obviously it wasn't really a deal breaker for you now was it? I agree that the battery should be replaceable in some fashion but insisting that it be user serviceable is unreasonable for some products. If they provide a means to have it replaced by the manufacturer for some appropriate length of time (similar to automobile service parts) then that is fine. I can think of several products where having the General Public poking around inside to replace a battery is not the best idea. User serviceable is obviously ideal when possible but don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Re:Servicing batteries

[squiggleslash]

They don't have to plan it. It's going to be obsolete in 2-4 years with no planning whatsoever. That's just how fast the market moves.

I think if you look at the vast majority of people who play video games, nobody is throwing out games because they're four years old. "Obsolete" doesn't mean "Can't run the latest stuff", it means "Is no longer useful".

My Wii and XBox 360 both see occasional use and work just fine. What the GP is complaining about is the notion that you'll have to throw out existing hardware in 2 years because it'll stop working properly. The fact it might not be able to run some of the latest games does not excuse that. It doesn't justify it. It's horrible, it's wrong, and it's not standard practice in the computer industry as a whole. The only reason people threw away their 360s after two years was because of the RRoD. Not because it was obsolete by 2010.

Re:Nickeling and Diming

[Nidi62]

The base "Switch Lite" ...

I think "Lite Switch" has a better ring to it.