Currently Online 
I mean, we can pretend like we know what 12 GB of RAM and 512 GB of storage mean, but I wouldn't guess most people have a true grasp on how that would play out on the console.
EShop: What we do know is that the current Switch chugs in the EShop, and that should be a slick experience. This is the main place, and for some of us the only place, where we buy games for the thing, fixing the experience here is necessary. Their priority should be getting the EShop running slick, without the loading problems--this includes its video previews, which I've noticed skip a lot on some games. If I'm going to the online shop, I want a pleasant experience that will make me interested in exploring the content there every week (I mean, to be fair, I'm in the Switch EShop and News channels most weeks looking at new games and sales).
Games: I don't buy the "Switch is missing games because of the hardware" argument at all - the best way to get devs onboard with a console is to get that console into the hands of customers, not simply making it powerful. The Switch has TONS of games. If a developer wants their game on it, they'll make a version of it that works on Switch - we got Witcher 3. The Wii, DS, and 3DS all had a lot of games as well, these included mainline Dragon Quest and Monster Hunter games. Nintendo made hardware to exceed the PS2 during that generation, and yet got a fraction of the games that the PS2 got. While they've been lower fidelity versions, the Switch and Wii both had more third party multiplatform titles than the Gamecube. In addition, the Gamecube multi platforms were missing features and content, and had no added benefits over the PS2 counterparts. The Wii, on the other hand had added features (notably IR aiming) and occasionally added content - and the Switch has added portability and TV play with a smooth transition between the two. There are people who play it exclusively in on handheld or home console version (https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2020/10/poll_do_you_play_your_switch_more_in_docked_or_handheld_mode - 20% according to that poll) but the other 80% take advantage of that convenience. It's true there are going to be some games that more powerful hardware will make much easier to port, and developers who are iffy about Switch 2 might be coaxed because of the lower effort needed to port... but again, Gamecube vs DS, Wii, and Switch 1 showed that getting consoles into the hands of gamers is the most effective way to get more games onto the platform.
RAM: I think the main appeal to it for most gamers is a dick measuring contest more than anything. Saying that "12 GB of RAM" actually means something is mostly bullshit (at least from the vast majority of gamers). The Wii had 88 MB of RAM and the OS ran slick, but the Wii U had 2GB of DDR3 ram (literally 23X as much) and the OS ran like shit. While it's true that more RAM is better, that doesn't mean a smaller amount can't be used effectively. They could have 16 GB of RAM and make an OS that still requires too many resources to run smoothly, or they could have something as slick on 6 or 8GB. In my opinion, the amount of RAM is not something that should concern gamers, just Nintendo's engineers.
On internal storage: Switch can be expanded fairly easily with SD memory cards, and I've yet to come across any perceivable performance differences between games running off an SD card vs games running off internal storage. price isn't an issue, internal or external, you're still paying for it. Personally, I think a minimal amount of internal storage would be better because that means a lower baseline for the price, which means when I'm buying Switch 2s for the rest of my family I can use up a Christmas and a birthday to give them the hardware and a massive SD card :D
Just my 2 cents.
I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.
