Today I learned that a game that runs at locked 30fps 98% of the time has an awful framerate.

You couldn't have done Xenoblade Chronicles X or Breath of the Wild on PS3 or 360, not without downgrades anyway.

Bigger "hit" is also kind of a subjective term. Switch could have a longer life span than the Wii sure ... the Wii had a much more fad-ish nature to its success, as such, when it dropped off ... it dropped off like a rock.

We don't know yet exactly how Nintendo intends to iterate or expand the Switch brand.

Normally people expect it to work like this ... you start at $300 ... drop to $250 .... have a redesign .... drop again ... redesign cosmetically .... $199.99 ... after 5-6 years you replace Switch with a "successor" and you start again at "0".

Well Switch already has broken several hardware rules, there's no guarantee it has to adhere to the above either.

It may well work more like this

$300 - Fixed price point. What happens is eventually the current model Switch will price down to $200-$250 to introduce a cheaper price tier, but the $300 price point remains, replaced every say 18-24 months by a new higher end model. So you just keep cycling in new models as time goes on rather than having a hard "generation end" (IE: Tegra X2 Switch, Tegra X3 Switch, etc. etc. etc.).

This approach I think would be appealing to Nintendo especially in the era of one hardware product line, it's more akin to what tablets use.

In that case, given enough time (7-9 years), provided the system is reasonably popular, could they reach a 100 million .... yeah maybe. In theory. 

No it's not. Mainly it is a handheld console. Like I said, the dock absolutely has nothing special. The whole hardware is inside the Switch "Handheld" device. Connecting it to the dock just removes the restrictions.

Another example Laptop is not a PC.

too early to say anything really. The start has been good.

Lol, of course when PS4/XB1 are around 7-10x stronger than PS3/Xbox360, so even if there is no optimisation they could easily outperform PS3/Xbox 360 games, on other hand Wii U is maybe around 1.5x stronger than PS3/Xbox360. Wii U wasnt power house and of course that want run perfectly open world games, but games like Xenoblade or Zelda BotW would hardly running at all on PS3/Xbox360. Talking about bad frame rate look frame rate of GTAV or Skyrim on PS3/Xbox360.

NFS: Most Wanted U was superior to PS3 and 360 versions because Criterion actually put decent effort into the port.  Granted it wasn't launch day but if it was then it would have been like all the other rushed EA ports.  Best port EA did for the Wii U (and last game) which they then punished Criterion for the poor sales even though it wasn't their fault with the release without all DLC included, marketing and price.

"Criterion Games has used the Wii U to conjure up the definitive console version of Need for Speed: Most Wanted. It's not an overwhelming advance that matches the visual fidelity of the PC version in all regards, but additions and tweaks are numerous and well-considered. At no expense to the frame-rate, textures stand at the midway point in the quality spectrum, between the more blurry assets we're seeing on PS3 and 360 and the highest possible settings on PC. It's a worthwhile upgrade that extends to reflection draw too, with all other visual facets being identical, and the frame-rate coming away smoother regardless."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-need-for-speed-most-wanted-wii-u-face-off

I'll say it'll likely stay a hit. People have rando buying habits, but it looks like the hybrid idea was a good one for Nintendo. Since their handhelds are WAY more popular than the consoles... why not fuse the two? I'll still wait for a version with a lot of the kinks ironed out. I have issues with it that need to be addressed first.

Need for Speed was not a CPU intensive game so it could run well on Wii U. But most 360 and PS3 games weren't like that. EA broke with Nintendo because the Wii U couldn't run Frostbite.

I think people need to stop comparing it to the Wii period, Switch is not a casual-centric gaming device.

Sure it has some nods to that audience, but that's about it, it's a gaming hybrid device for people who need to have core games with them even when they go outside the house, which to me is a hardcore proposition in its own right. That's the "wow" of the Swtich, not that it can run some small simple game, the 3DS can do that too, it's that it can play a big giant adventure game like Zelda or Skyrim anywhere. As such it has appeal even to PS4/XBox gamers. 

That's going to be the main appeal, it's what's driving adoption right now in Zelda.

If things like 1,2 Switch and Just Dance end up driving Switch adoption and selling tens of millions of copies, ok, then you can say otherwise, but right now, nope.

Even the marketing is basically majority focused on adult males, who are definitely not the novice gamer type.

The challenge for Nintendo now is to keep games like Zelda coming, games that really excite/interest enthusiast gamers. Switch will have to succeed on its own merits, it unlikely to have that Wii/DS casual appeal, but on the other hand it's wide functionality as a gaming device can bring more core gamers back towards buying one (perhaps in addition to a PS4) than other "failed" Nintendo platforms like GameCube did. So it has that going for it.