Nope, those gaming phones are very niche devices and imo a bit of an oxymoron in terms of what they offer, realistically I would never want to be gaming as I travel on my mobile phone because I would be constantly aware of the fact that the device I'm using for recreation is the device which has my contact details on it, my map to find where I'm going and of course the phone to arrange my meeting/collection on arrival. Sapping that battery for gaming which could be done on something like a Switch in my other pocket really doesn't have any real world appeal to me.

Sony is disappointed in Mobile because it is loosing them Billions. Along with the drop to 9 Million units sold they are also forecasting $300 Million in losses. 

That would not be the case with 5, 10, or 15 Million PlayStation Mobile devices a year. 

If done right the investment is in a scalable ecosystem, so everything they do benefits every product. No more Mobile Communications VS Home Entertianment and Sound VS Game and Network Services VS Pictures VS Music, with each team building their own products to compete against each other. Instead, Sony would have one OS team, one App team, and one Network Services team. Everyone working towards a common goal and cutting out redundancy.

This puts more people on their OS and Store Front more of the time, with no fragmentation, which means more revenue and profits. The PlayStation 4 OS and Store are the most profitable thing at Sony, adding more ways to access the OS, Apps, Games, and Store will only increase their Revenue and Profits.

PS4 started at zero 5 years ago, and it is now profiting in the billions. Switch has been out almost a year and a half, and it has been a very successful device so far. Yet neither one runs, Android, iOS, Windows, or MAC OS. You don't need Android, iOS, Windows, or MAC OS to make a successful and profitable device. 

A $500 PlayStation Phone would be much more advanced than anything else on the market. Smartphones are not $800 - $1,000 products. They are ~$300 devices that are sold at massive mark ups.

http://time.com/money/5014941/iphone-x-cost-price/

That is not the business model PlayStation runs on. Sony sells PlayStation products at close to break even. PS4 was about $380 at launch, and sold at retail for $400.

https://mashable.com/2013/11/20/ps4-cost-brief/#qM7718KLmiqG

A PlayStation Phone would definitly have a limited market, just as a PlayStation Console does. I don't think anyone denies that. Sony is only playing to the 100 Million gamers out there that buy Home Consoles and Handhelds, no the 600 Million that use Windows, or the 1.3 Million on iOS and MAC, or the 2 Billiion on Android.

With a properly done PlayStation Phone, it would have a shared library with the home console, making it the only place with all current AAA 3rd Party and SIEWWS games. A Phone that allows you to play GTA, Madden, Call of Duty, Gran Tusimo, and compete with your friends on all PlayStation platforms, would offer something completely different than Razor, Apple, Samsung and the rest. 

I agree that they have to wait a few years though. They need at least a 7nm if not 7nm+ AMD SOC, M.2 Storage, HBM RAM, a Solid State Battery, and 5G to make it work. 

I am sure Sony going to release a portable PlayStation in the future.they launch the Vita at the wrong time.they should have launch psv during the current period because the technology is much improved and matured which could have helped them to bring more demanding third party games to it.

What makes you think they would even sell 5 million? Why would they make a playstation phone with added performance and and better quality, more complex hardware for less than they're charging for their current phone lineup? What makes you think if they're losing 300 million selling 9 million phones when they don't even have to support the OS and build up app support that it would be more profitable to do that, only sell another 5 million phones, and not be in an even bigger hole?

So you want to put the Sony music record label types... making an operating system and applications. Same with with their movie making company? Do you know the first thing about those industries? i can assure you, the apps they make for their services are just a drop in the bucket. The fact that they need to make apps for windows, PS4 OS, and android is not the issue even a little bit. At this point, I have to ask, do you know the first thing about software development? Never mind that even if Sony were to make a playstation OS for their phones, they would STILL have to make iOS and Android and Macand Windows versions of their applications and network services because you cannot expect your install base to automatically switch to your operating system. Why do you think Microsoft makes Office for Macs? Do you think they do that out of the kindness of their hearts? Our of a sense of fair competition? No. It's because they want to firmly establish Office as "the standard" and that means making sure everyone can use it. They'll still have to do everything they're doing now *and* support a new OS in ways they've never done before. Again, how is this going to make them more money?

They have already added more ways to access apps games and store. Playstation Now says "Hello!". It just makes zero sense to make an entirely new OS when an app will be nearly as effective without forcing a user to decide between Playstation and everything else. This walled garden approach you want Sony to take hasn't worked for Microsoft every single time they've tried it. Yet you still think it's effective because Apple got it right, and Steam kinda did too, while ignoring the dozens and dozens of failures. People just want to use their devices in the most convenient way possible, not in the way that's most profitable for the companies they support. It won't be more convenient for an Android user to switch to Playstation OS, not now, and almost definitely not ever.

And by the way, PS4 did not start at zero 5 years ago, it had the momentum of over 15 years of the Playstation brand pushing it right from the start. You're grossly, grossly oversimplifying things.

You include vita in this comparison, you are wrong. Vita is like Wii U, it exist where smart phones are on the rise , it was exist as vague gadget not as handled nor as smart devices. 

If SONY. want to sell a lot of phones they have to choose between making areal smart phones or a handled. The vita was an attempt to subdue smart phones market. So using Vita as an example is a mistake .

And also Razer and ROG are PC gaming brand and also considered new compared to SONY (while i believe Razer is old but compared to SONY it still new) . So comparing them also wrong. 

I would welcome it, but they may want to try strengthen their mobile market before getting back into a gaming phone.

Okay, trying to parse out this language so bear with me.

So Vita is an unfair comparison because smartphones are on the rise? How does that make sense when Nintendo sold 70 million 3DSs and is now pushing 20 million Switches in a little over a year? I don't get how you can claim the Vita wasn't a handheld. For many it was the best handheld ever made. It was a portable handheld gaming console by every definition, and very clearly played games first and foremost.

Sony decided to stop selling handhelds and they still haven't sold a lot of phones, so clearly the Vita wasn't hampering their smartphone sales.

And why is comparing gaming oriented phones catering to a gaming market which is arguably larger than console sales in many ways not a fair comparison? ASUS is a huge company. Their gaming brand is on pretty much every product they make. They sell tends of millions of ROG branded devices every single years. It's not exactly small potatoes.

Why is not unfair because Vita was promoted as a competitor and act like a device to compete with premium gadget like iPhones or android devices. It's a super premium price compared to 3DS .

ASUS of course it's big brand but their market are more of PC and not consoles and handled devices. Or i can say they are more of spare part and hardware brand rather then a gaming company . 

PS Vita's release price: $249
3DS's release price: $249

What a super premium price in that $0 difference.

Of course ASUS is a big PC brand. So what? They make dozens if not hundreds of products directly aimed at PC gamers who tend to spend more money on gaming hardware than console enthusiasts do.  They're marketing the phone as "made for PUBG". How is that not in direct competition with whatever phone Sony would be producing? They'd be going after very similar audiences.