Listening to all this Apple vs Android is pretty funny when you consider Android owns like 80%+ of the WW mobile OS market. So, yea, maybe an Apple console with Nintendo games MAY mean something here in the US (though, the Apple brand didn't exactly help the Pippin), but WW it would really mean spit. The PS has pretty much reclaimed its spot as the go to gaming HW after the slip up that was last gen. As long as Sony doesn't make any major slip ups, again, which I'm sure they have learned their lesson, it's going to be extremely hard to take that away from them.

Of course, Nintendo wouldn't let itself be bought by Apple. They would rather go 3rd party or mobile themselves than lose control of their IPs.

Apple is huge in Japan too. And pretty big in Europe too. 

Nintendo could always enter into a partnership with Apple or Google or about half dozen other companies rather than go 3rd party too. Being a 3rd party is nothing great, ask Sega. 

Nintendo could get a much more favorable and better deal than that, again I've said it before it's like thinking a Victoria Secret supermodel suddenly has to date the fat guy at the end of the bar just because she broke up with her athlete boyfriend. Nope. She's going to have plenty of better offers than grovelling like a regular divorcee would have to. 

Again, reread my last sentence.  "Of course, Nintendo wouldn't let itself be bought by Apple. They would rather go 3rd party or mobile themselves than lose control of their IPs."  Nintendo would have to be in some really hard times for them to not have full control of what they release and what they want to release it on. 

And 3rd party WOULD NOT be the same thing for Nintendo as it was for Sega.  Sega is in the position it is in because of poor decisions in finances and making poor games with Sonic slapped on them just for a quick buck.  Nintendo still has pride in their work.  They could release a full-fledged Mario game on PS4/XBO/Mobile on their terms and timetables and sell millions easily. 

It's going to take more than "terms", Sony and MS are going to have to offer Nintendo much more than that IMO. 

Nintendo doesn't need to go slumming like a common 3rd party when many vendors like Apple or Google or Facebook or Disney would likely be quite happy to finance/co-develop hardware with Nintendo. 

So Sony/MS will have to top that and IMO the price will be steep. I would say MS would basically have to give Nintendo control of their XBox division pretty much for example for them to consider something like that. 

And you're right, Nintendo is in a very different position from Sega, Pokemon Go shows how valuable their IP can be, so they have options that Sega never could've dreamed of. 

Given the choice I think Nintendo would prefer to work with another company (like say a Google) on a hardware platform that they have considerable control and design input in than just be a regular third party. 

I never grabbed an iPhone or an iPad and went "this is so low-res".

I don't get the resolution war on such small devices, most people, if not all, can't recognize the difference. Apple was the first smartphone manufacturer to recognize the importance of higher res screens on smartphones, other companies took a long while to catch up to the iPhone 4 display quality. I acknowledge that others offer screens with higher resolutions, but at this point, I don't consider it a big advantage. It's definitely not something I would consider when I upgrade my smartphone, both options are great enough.

Sony and MS wouldn't have to offer them anything.  If the NX crashes and burns, Nintendo only has two options.  They either go mobile. Or they stick with consoles, possibly porting their games to mobile.  No one has to offer them anything, because Nintendo no longer holds the cards.  Unless they want to stop making games, they have to have something to put them on.

Sure, they have good IPs, but after the Wii U and hypothetical NX failure, it's obvious those IPs won't carry a system.  I'm sure MS may offer them money to have their games exclusive, depending how well the Xbox division is doing then, but I'm not sure Nintendo would take it.  Especially if they would have to ignore the 70M+ PS4 systems that would be out at that time. All Sony would do is probably offer a free dev kit and the same deal they make to any 3rd party and Nintendo could release it on whatever system they wanted.

And I highly doubt they want to go into a partnership with Google or Apple at that point, because in the position Nintendo would find itself, both would want something in return besides the fees Sony and MS ask to publish a game on their system.  Like part ownership of Nintendo.  Or of the IPs.  And they would have greater control over the development of those games.  Those are things Nintendo wants to avoid at all costs.

I think you are missing the point.

The iPhone is priced as a high-end device... But much of it's hardware is only average/mid-range.

In other words, you are not getting good value for money...

I disagree, I am certainly happier with my premium iPhone than I was with my premium Samsung.

If some people are happier with more RAM, some are happier with with Touch ID & 3D touch and a processor that doesnt throttle.

99% of Android phones released with SD 810 had embarrassing issues with heating up and throttling, it was a complete joke. Were buyers getting good value for their money? Not to mention, they were getting a much inferior GPU, but let's not mention those facts.

Let's pretend that only iPhone users get the shortest end of the stick in every scenario and there is nothing superior about the iPhone experience.

And when Apple does decide to catch up to it's competitors... Then people start to hail it as the second coming.
For instance, people defended Apple for years with their decision not to increase device sizes... But when they did... People upgraded and praised Apple for the decision, you literally can't win.

Who are these people? Fanboys on the internet? 

Millions of people in the real world were holding off buying an iPhone, until they got iPhones with bigger screens. Talk is cheap, voting with money matters.

Just look at this graph and keep in mind that iPhone 6 was released in late 2014.

and guess what? I am one of those millions.

and seriously, this argument is silly, bringing up "people on the internet" to make a point? lol

People also said Touch ID is a gimmick, look we are now. But I am above bringing up those silly people to make a point.

If you think that the iPhone 6s 4.7" 1334x750 display or 6s Plus 5.5" 1920x1080 IPS display is somehow in-league with the 2560x1440/4k display's... Then you are simply kidding yourself. There is a massive perceivable difference... Especially when it comes to Aliasing.

Keep in mind that the eye doesn't see in pixels either.

Ok. So every reviewer on the internet is kidding themselves and the iPhone screen is terrible compared to other flagships.

I really don't care about the numbers you are throwing because I know them, and acknowledged them, and they don't mean much in the real world to a lot of people, including critics. I also admit the screens aren't better than those you find on the Samsung S7, for example, but they are not crap, either.

iOS being locked down is both a Pro and Con, as I elaborated on. :P
I can see why people would like things on either side of the fence.

For me though, I spent years with Windows Phone which is even more tightly locked down than iOS... And now happily using Android and enjoy the customization that a more open device allows.

Good.

If you think the iPhone has ever been in the same league as the big 20-40 Megapixel shooters... You are simply kidding yourself... And there are allot of such phones ranging from the Lumia 1020, Sony Xerpia, Asus Zenfone 3, Samsung Galaxy Zoom, HTC One M9+, Lenovo Vibe X3, Huawei Mate 9... And more.

Galaxy Zoom and Lumia 1020 were designed for that purpose, a purpose that doesn't seem enticing to consumers, both phones are discontinued and got no "sequels"

I am comparing the iPhone to the other top selling premium phones. Not some discontinued niche products, and yes, that includes Sony Xperia phones. I don't know why included the Xperia when it constantly performs worse than the Samsung S phones, that would've a better line up to include in your list.

Even the other flagships made by the same companies that made those niche products couldn't compete with their own camera-focused line up, were they being cheap and their users were not getting good value for their money then? Hardly. 

You know better than bringing megapixles into the discussion, but I think you realized you were wrong so you are just throwing names and numbers.

You have obviously not seen the benefits more Ram can bring.
Imagine having multiple Apps running in the background... Then load up your web browser with a heap of tabs open... Then switch back to your App... Then switch back to your browser.

What happens then? The Phone doesn't have the memory to hold everything and the browser is then required to refresh all the pages and render them again, the iPhone needs to evict apps once memory is full sooner than any other high-end device, this is a literal physical limitation and it has been that way for years.

I think you are under the assumption that more Ram accellerates processing, it doesn't, of course it's not an issue if you are only a light user anyway, power users will of course wish to adhere to more capable devices.

Browser tabs refreshing is a problem I ran into with my first iPhone, iPhone 6, no denying that. It wasn't a big issue to me and it's certainly not something I run into now with my 6s. So I'll give you this one

Why? Because everyone on this planet has the exact same kind of usage scenario's and expectations that you do? Hardly.

Lol. Everything you brought up and held it against the iPhone was because you wanted your device to behave in a certain way, and now you are telling me I am not getting good value for my money.

I, on the other hand, was just trying to bring balance to the discussion. And giving examples on how Android users got the shorter end of the stick with the CPU, GPU, not having touch ID for a good long while, non-existent long term software support. However, I am not saying "they are not getting good value for your money" because non of that may matter to them, and they probably value screen resolution and more RAM above other things. I used to prefer the options Android gave me at some point, so I get it.

Lastly, If you are replying again, please refrain from using "people on the internet said X" statements. It's silly. Fanboys are everywhere, on every side. You are better than that.

Listening to all this Apple vs Android is pretty funny when you consider Android owns like 80%+ of the WW mobile OS market. So, yea, an Apple console with Nintendo games MAY mean something here in the US (though, the Apple brand didn't exactly help the Pippin), but WW it would really mean spit. The PS has pretty much reclaimed its spot as the go to gaming HW after the slip up that was last gen. As long as Sony doesn't make any major slip ups, again, which I'm sure they have learned their lesson, it's going to be extremely hard to take that away from them.