So fine, now we have a basis. Quite some of these games are on the Switch too, and while you make screen comparisons, the Switch always has a bigger and better screen available.
The Switch always has a bigger screen available? My Switch doesn't, it ONLY has a bigger screen available at home and in a hotel room on vacation (hotel TVs tend to be pretty shitty, even in five-star-hotels). Every other time it has to depend on its 6.2''-display with 1280x720 resolution and 60 Hertz.
My iPad Pro on the other hand has a 222% larger screen area for input and output, which is very convenient for most games:
The Switch always has a better screen available? Even at home on an expensive TV, I really doubt that. The Switch can't benefit from the higher resolution of 4K-TVs, so it is stuck with a 1920x1080 resolution, the iPad Pro models have resolutions from 2048x1536 to 2732x2048 and sweet native 120Hz displays.
For the image quality:
You completely miss my point, which is: inhowfar create the specs a better experience.
And do your comparison pics have JPEG-compression for the Switch-pictures? Because, look at the Hammer Head logo, it is quite round, no loss through resolution, but around the borders are typical artifacts for lower quality jpegs. So it seems the loss of quality is because of the compression of the screenshot, not because of resolution. Let's tests it. I took the original resolution ipad screenshot, resaved it as a lower quality JPG and zoomed in. It looks like this:
Comparison pics should be uncompressed screenshots, not something taken from the internet and blame the loss of quality on the hardware, if it didn't happen in reality. Something to remember: JPEG artifacts are typically good visible near edges of areas of different colors/brightness. The edge itself might be relatively sharp, but around it you see 'dirty patches' of chaotic pixels.
Here is by the way a screenshot from the Switch version of FFXV Pocket, which apparently isn't compressed to death. You can zoom in and look how the artifacts present in the above images are missing there.
So fine, now we have a basis. Quite some of these games are on the Switch too, ...
... but most of them aren't (yet).
no Civilization Revolution 1 + 2 (but with Civ 6... who cares), no X-COM, no Rome: Total War, no Tropico, no Baldur's Gate 1 + 2, no Icewind Dale, no Planescape: Torment, no Knights of the Old Republic, no Jade Empire, no GTA games at all (I still hope for a GTA collection on Switch), no Max Payne, no Rayman Jungle/Fiesta Run (but Rayman Legends!), no Oddmar, Life is Strange games (would be a good fit), only The Room 1 (where are the other 3 games?), no République, no Ace Attorney or Layton games (seriously Capcom + Level-5...why?), no Ghost Trick, no Hitman/Lara Croft/Deus Ex GO, no Monument Valley 1 + 2, only Batman + MineCraft Story Mode, only a fraction of good Point'n'Click adventures...
And? Most of Switch games aren't on iPad either. This point really holds no strength. So no Breath of the Wild, Octopath Traveler, Dragon Quest Builders, Xenoblade Chronicles and more on ipad. The better specs really don't help here.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't want to reduce the importance the iPad or other mobile devices as game devices. But their advantage is not possible better specs in comparison to the Switch. Because these specs always have to materialize in games before it has any advantage to the players. The advantage are possibilities of usage beyond pure gaming.