Current owner of the Atari trademark is actually a classic game company named Infogrames. I saw this logo in quite some games back in the day:

Atari is like the ultimate zombie company. How many Ataris have filed for bankruptcy at this point? They should have just sold the Atari brand and IP to Namco and called it a day.

it doesnt have to be as  powerful as a ps or xbox but it should be strong enough to get a good 3rd party support. The Switch would not be a worse console if it would have Battlefield, The division and a cod . I mean some rounds battlefield on a couch with a handhelp switch  would be a reason to buy it for me.

Switch is powerful enough to get third party support, it's just up to publishers whether they want to provide that support. The Switch could run COD, Activision just can't be bothered.

The DS could run COD if Activision was willing to put the time and effort into distilling that game down into something that can be played on a DS. The point is the amount of effort that takes, and it just not being worth that effort.

Let's put it this way. If it costs significantly more to port a PS4 game to Switch than it does to port it to Xbox one, while at the same time expecting significantly less sales, it becomes very difficult to justify that effort. If a port requires minimal effort than the sales that port needs to have to justify it is much smaller. This is where Nintendo missed the mark.

Porting COD to Switch is much less investment than porting COD from PS3/360 to Wii, yet that was done several times and was profitable.

More demanding games than COD have been ported, so the failure squarely lies with Activision.

"Porting COD to Switch is much less investment than porting COD from PS3/360 to Wii, yet that was done several times and was profitable."

Source? Or is that just an assumption?

It's common knowledge. Switch is much closer in both power and architecture to PS4/Xbone than Wii was to PS3/360, this is why we see the kind of ports to Switch like Doom 2016, Hellblade, Wolfenstein II, etc while Wii never got those kind of conversions. As for them being profitable, they did it 5 times. Companies don't repeat unprofitable ventures.

For what it's worth, the Xbox 360 and Wii both had Power PC processors, and the PS3 used a Power PC-based processor. The Switch uses an ARM processor. Last I checked the Switch's ARM processor is nothing like the PS4 and Xbox One's x86 processor. Even if the Switch is "Closer to power and architecture" doesn't mean it's easier to port. And besides, even if it is easier, how much easier is it? Define "Much less investment".

Also, kinda curious how you appear to be pretending that two Call of Duty Wii U titles didn't exist. I wonder why... perhaps that has something to do the lack of an appearance of a Switch Call of Duty title? I bet it did.

But even assuming the Wii U had nothing to do with it, just because Activision invested in several Wii games doesn't mean they were happy with the sales of each of those titles, and we don't know whether the development of those titles was subsidized, or whether Activision was required to honor an agreement with Nintendo regardless of sales. There's a lot of politics involved in video games, and you're making several assumptions by just chalking that up to "companies don't make repeat unprofitable ventures".

Besides, didn't Nintendo just release another Labo kit? My local game store hilariously displayed them right next to the $9.99 clearance bin Labo 1 and 2 kits they had on display. Sony's still losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year churning out cell phones year after year too. Seems to me that companies repeat unprofitable ventures regularly.

PS3/360 had DX9 era GPUs and multi-core, multi-threaded 3GHz CPUs versus a DX7 era GPU and single core/single threaded 729MHz CPU on Wii, also 88MB of RAM vs just under 500MB. Switch's GPU is actually more modern than PS4/Xbone, it's CPU is also multicore just with less cores at not to dissimilar a speed, RAM is much closer at 3GB vs 5GB. The gap is objectively much smaller this time around.

Do you have any evidence that COD on Wii didn't make money? Cos the actual evidence, the fact they brought over 5 of them, 4 of which sold over a million, points to them being worthwhile.

For someone who claims to own a Switch you come across an awful lot like someone who hates Nintendo and wants to see them fail.