More like when people want to play a game that's only on X platform, they either buy X platform or they don't play that game.

If they can play it on another platform, particularly one they already own, they don't need to buy another portable.

That's not a case in point. You can hold your breath and even stomp your feet, but stating an opinion and ending with Period regardless of what you believe doesn't make it a case in point.

At worrst Nintendo stops making portables. 

That means it's got more time making fun games. 

and inovative Consule's to plug on my TV.

I think this is a Win Win Situation. Let it happen for God sake why fight it.

So are you predicting the death of the home console because everyone has to own a PC or Laptop anyways, and all these systems have the ability to play readily available inexpensive games?

Both dedicated systems and all in ones have their own advantages and disadvantages, and because of these different advantages/disadvantages the systems tend to be used in very different ways. This creates an asymetric market where both platforms can co-exist and their growth is dependant on their own merits.

Indeed.  I've always stated the same thing; they really are two different markets in the grand scheme of things, and for the foreseeable future there will be people who want both.

WTF ARE U PEOPLE ARGUING ABOUT. THE IPHONE DONT EVEN HAVE FREAKING BUTTONS, XPERIA(OR WHATEVER THE HELL ITS CALLED) IS ANOTHER NGAGE( people dont want to play powerful games on their phone to drian its batteries).

The only platform that has  touchscreen, buttons; quality and cheap downloadables games( e-shop); does not jepodise the battery of your essential phone device and doesnt have its screen stupidly expose for cracks and smuges( yes that lg 3dphone is quite stupid) is the freakin ds/3ds.

I can agree with the asymetry you speak of.  Especially that there are clearly polar opposites avialabe in terms of console platforms.  With portables on one end, and then non portables at the other end (do-it-alls vs specialized).

If this polarity increases then yes, I think your point is valid.  Because the more seperate they become the more individualized their markets are in terms of consumer demographics and the like.  But what happens when they start to collide?  What happens when the line begins to blur?

The Ipad is a step above the itouch in terms of being better suited for deeper play.  And the 3DS is Nintendo's step towards making home console styled games for portables.  So my question to you is this:  Are these two markets getting farther apart (supporting your claim), or are they getting closer together (defeating your claim)?

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure either now.  It's a tough question and there is some evidence to support both sides.  And to make matters worse, as I stated in another post, home consoles of today were once known for their portability (compared to the arcade environment at the time where you actually had to travel to the location to play).

If consumers haven't started asking themsleves that yet, what makes you think they all of a sudden would in the future? As I've said, cell phone gaming has been here for well over a decade. And yet the DS has become the highest selling console ever, and even the less popular PSP has done a respectable 66 million and is currently owning Japan. Exactly what features do smartphones have over normal gaming handheld consoles that would make gamers want to stick exclusively to those (talking in terms of purely GAMING features)?

Of course, there will always be some soccer moms out there who will simply buy the smartphones and play the games on those, but most of these consumers wouldn't have bought a DS/PSP anyway..

Just like PCs and home consoles, I believe the two should be able to co exist, because they are entirely differnet products deisgned for different things. Handheld consoles will never become obsolete, just like home consoles never will, because there will always be a sufficient audience out there that will want a machine deticated primarily to gaming, as I do, and many I know.

I mentioned this in the last post (thought not directed at your comment then).  You say these markets are seperate because of how different they are...

Are they becoming more differentiated?  Or are they becoming more similar?  You mention PCs and home consoles as an example.  Reflect on the current state of these two platforms for a moment... TVs are starting to become a hub for many of the utilities and functions that were originally designed for a PC (internet, file sharing, even having social apps like twitter and fb on your tv).  And phones and PCs are also starting to blur the line between there once unique utilities (just look at any apple product of course).

If their functions are starting to collide then that means the markets are starting to collide.  If the opposite was happening then the markets would be seperating and your claims would be true.  for now I won't even argue whether or not people still want their hardcore games (I'm including all 3 big players in their right now).  You can have that even if I disagree... but I think it would be hard to argue that once specialized devices are still retaining, let alone increasing, their unique draw of specialized utility.

In other words, I'm only granting you one or the other.  You can say people still want their hardcore gaming, but the reason can't be because the markets are seperate, or that they are continuing to seperate.  What do you think?

Here is the reason Apple and mobile gaming is no threat to Nintendo: Games.

At the end of the day its games that sell systems. No one buys iphones and Androids for Angry birds or such, they buy it as a phone with a lot of features, games are an afterthought. People will buy DS and Wii for the games, even without extra features. This is why Nintendo has no need to entertain mobile games, or garage devs, because their games don’t propel buyers, it won;t bring people out to buy the systems.

Yes 3DS’s lineup is pretty weak, but if you recall, the DS was even weaker, only Mario 64 as is big launch game, and now its the highest selling game system in history, console or handheld, why? Because of software that brought people out.

New Super mario bros and the like ignited DS sales, and it never looked back.

Apple is no threat to Nintendo, nor is Sony or MS, the only threat is Nintendo itself, if they release compelling, and interesting software on the 3DS, it’ll sell like there is no tomorrow, if they don’t, it will flop, plain and simple.

I've had an iPod Touch for a couple of months now, and there really is nothing that's going to pull me away from dedicated devices anytime soon.

Sure, I went through the initial novelty phase and downloaded a few games like Angry Birds, but I'm already bored of it (which is why I find the suggestion that it's the new SMB to be utterly laughable, as there's no way Angry Birds will be around and keeping things fresh 25 years from now).

I've tried out a few games that were obviously attempts at fitting a console experience onto a device with only one button, and they've all been worse off for it. While this remains the case, no amount of app store growth (so we're including fart apps in this growth, yes?) is going to diminish the appeal of a dedicated device built for gaming in favour of something where gaming is a coincidental afterthought to me.