Just stop it.

He said that the 3D aspect is only one the part of the system that is shown. This because Nintendo want competitors to think that they are going after sustaining innovations.

You don't know anything more about the 3DS than he does, but considering the business strategy that Nintendo is using, his assumption that the 3DS is disruptive is at least more backed up by theory than your dissmissal of his claims.

What are you trying to prove? That it is not disruptive? In that case, malstrom's references to Nintendo's strategy holds much more merit than you saying "OOOOH HE'S SAYING 3D IS DISRUPTIVE I'VE GOT YOU NOW MALSTROM, LOL" When he didn't even say anything about the 3D tech being disruptive. He said that the system in itself is disruptive because Nintendo is following the strategy of disruption.

You're twisting his words and it's bloody obvious.

I still think it's super weird to pass judgment on this hours after we hear about it, while still claiming it's "too soon to tell" about the vitality sensor. It looks to me like his mouth is stained blue; sugarwater dribbling from his chin.  3D Koolaid sure tastes great!

Besides, even he said that the DS wasn't disruptive.  Why would adding 3D screens make it disruptive?  For that matter, what is it supposed to be disrupting?  If it's too soon to call anything, 24 hours after an announcement would be it. 

"Gaming already had its 3d revolution. But note that the 3d revolution of gaming occurred INSIDE the game. The display being 3d or not isn’t going to change anything."

"3D Koolaid sure tastes great!"

Why are you still insisting he's praising the 3D aspect when he stated that's not what will sell the system?

"Besides, even he said that the DS wasn't disruptive."

Where?

Come on, try to remember the things you've read!

"Remember class, DS is not a disruptive product. That is what the Wii is."

Since we don't have anything else but the 3D info, he's making stuff up to praise?  That's just grasping at straws, pure and simple.

He actually did say that in one of his older articles. It's blue ocean and innovative, but not made to gore the PSP.

HOWEVER! Why shouldn't the 3DS be disruptive? Perhaps it's designed to gore the PSP successor.

DS was blue Ocean not disruptive because it didn't change the values of Handheld, 3DS will, but 3D is only a portion of the 3DS, the 3DS will be disruptive, but 3D will only play a part of the reason for that.

And all that's based on is a bunch of maybes and ifs. Sean is so much more worthwhile to read when he sticks to known realities instead of his fantasies.

His fantasies have a way of coming true

When have you ever though Malstrom was a worthwhile read? Your entire blog is made to contradict his.

I was actually asking, not claiming he wrote something other than he wrote, which you did.