No, a much more powerful system getting a port does not mean a much less powerful system has a better chance of getting the same port. There's no logical flow there. And does anyone really think a PS4 level Switch is gonna happen? That is a Switch 2, not a Switch Pro. I don't even see why anyone would speculate about that. Those two power levels are far too disparate to call the same system. They would play entirely different games, how do I know...because PS4 and Switch play entirely different games! Switch gets a few greatly graphically downgraded versions of PS4, they don't play the same games.

You're even talking about them (Switch and Switch Pro) as two different systems, saying the Switch Pro would get a port and then maybe later OG Switch would get a port, but you're pretending like you're talking about the same system.

Once again, I don't know what makes you think the better battery version of the Switch is equivalent to a double-powered Switch but would just run out of battery sooner. The better battery Switch is the same OG Switch with better battery life. A theoretical much more powerful Switch would have as little in common with either of the OG Switch models.

And again, you're just assuming a flood of PS4/XB1 games would come to Switch, and that normal Switch's could play them when docked or with a battery pack.

You're also still somehow for some reason who knows why not seeing how the marketing and optics of telling owners they can't play new games unless they buy peripherals is god awful. Switch is a Switch is a Switch. You know what battery packs do? They increase battery capacity. They aren't for playing more powerful games or dividing a game library in two.

I'll say it again: imagine a phone company said you can't use some apps unless you have the phone running on a battery pack. Nobody would think that makes any sense and the company would get a ton of crap for it. Because it doesn't make any sense!

You're making a whole lot of assumptions on what would happen if a much more powerful Switch launched and ignoring the obvious flaws simply to play PS4/Xb1 games on a Switch (but again, only certain Switch's!).

Confusing customers and owners, making strange random requirement forcing people to pick up peripherals to play games that don't require peripherals, and splintering the game library and the userbase are not things that people would be over the moon about, they are not things that would dramatically extend the lifecycle of anything, and it would certainly not be highway robbery in favor of the customer but the exact opposite.

Actually I don't think you understand the tech stuff you're trying to talk about here. 

Even the base Switch (OG model) can run at a far higher performance than what is currently available. 

You can see this on Homebrewed/hacked 1st gen Switch models, games like the The Witcher 3 can be overclocked to run at a full 60 fps undocked for example. 

The bottleneck is mainly the battery life and even that doesn't drop as much as one would expect ... it drops from like a shade over 3 hours down to 2 hours with the old model, that's all. The Switch even the base line versions is more powerful, the 16nm Mariko revision can go higher than that if you understand performance to watt. 

There are probably a lot of devs that wouldn't mind their PS4/XB1 titles on Switch, but it's too much of a pain in the ass and cuts too far to the max performance as is to make it worthwhile for everyone, but if you could double that performance say, suddenly I do think it opens the door to a ton of content the Switch is missing out on for really no great reason right now. You have a lot more performance overhead where devs can more easily and more faithfully bring games over without such extreme sacrifices and probably is less labour intensive too. 

Switch can sell better though.

Multiple form factors, multiple market segments, one hardware base, one set of games for all.

Pretty bold statement, haven't seen Nintendo issue an apology for the Switch lite?

Mario Kart 8 - Some modes are 30fps.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-mario-kart-8-deluxe-tech-analysis

Mario Odyssey. - 720P-900P.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-how-super-mario-odyssey-pushes-switch-to-its-limits

Splatoon 2. - Hub world is 30fps.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-how-does-splatoon-2-tech-improve-over-wii-u

ARMS. - 900P 30fps in 4 player split screen, 900P 60fps in 2 player split screen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP3l19Uio1g

Captain Toad. - Accurate.

Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze. - Accurate.

Mario Party. - Probably accurate. Couldn't find anything.

Pokemon Sword/Shield. - 864-1080P, 30fps with drops to 20fps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czXsJwfjps8

Zelda: Breath of the Wild. - 810-900P 30fps.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-uses-dynamic-resolution-scaling

Zelda: Links Awakening. - 720P-1080P 30fps.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-zelda-links-awakening-tech-analysis

Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle. - 900P 30fps.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-mario-rabbids-is-one-of-switchs-finest-tech-showcases

Luigi's Mansion 3. - 900P - 1080P 25-30fps with poor frame pacing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq_ayMLGDNo


So Switch 1st party games that are a full fat 1080P, 60fps is the exception not the rule.

I could probably keep going on...

The Switch is such a good idea, they should go right ahead and make a Super Switch (the Switch 2 with a better name), the technology is sitting there waiting already.

CPU: Cortex A57 from 2014's Note 4, upgrade to 2019's A76. You only need 4. Uses the same amount of power.
GPU: Maxwell from 2015, upgrade to 2019's Turing. Double them to 512 cores using 7nm (half a mobile GTX 1650 super, uses 1/4 the power or 10 watts). Uses slightly more power like OG Switch.
Memory: Double bandwidth like iPad or Tegra X2 to 128bit. Use DDR4X from 2019 (no need for DDR5 but sure if you can use it, do it). Double the amount to 8GB and raise the price of the console to $399. This money would also allow faster storage, 64GB standard.
Screen: smaller bezel IGZO 7 inch in the same footprint screen. 720p is fine, but 1080p would be fine also.

With ram and those faster than PS4 CPU cores, you can play all PS4 games on it at 720p easily. Some even at 1080p with minor changes (like Alien Isolation or Witcher 3). All OG Switch games would be 1440p easily.

What do I actually want, since we already have a portable system but no home console? The exact same thing but with the GTX 1650 Super in it, a home console for $250. Just like the PS4, it usually costs an extra $50 to make a video card into a home console (PS4 came with the $350 Radeon 7870 a year later).

This one has already been released in 2019

So basically greed is your answear?

Nintendo already sells and makes decent profits on hardware.
A 149$ Switch TV, would also be sold at simular profits amounts.

Why would nintendo sudenly become more greedy, and sell it higher?
Because it can? it wasnt happy with current profits? This could move alot of units I think, which would equal more software sales, ect.

I vote for a Switch Tv release in fall 2020, it's the only product missing from the Switch family of systems, an home-only console without compromises.
I can't say which chipset will be used for a Switch Tv (X2, Xavier) but it surely will be able to boost all past and future Switch games to 1080p at 60fps with better graphics/effects and it could be able to do 4k in upscaling. Bundled with a Pro controller and an SSD with at least 128gb it can be the perfect system to play Nintendo games for people who don't care about portability, at a reasonable price of $199.

They would be making more money if it was dockable. Terrible business.

It could be the new tegra x1+ ( 25% faster with AI upscaling (DLSS?))

so just a chip revision (again)