I always thought Switch was a mid-gen sub for WiiU, with the ladder being swept under the rug never to be acknowledged again.

What you say is one thing, but what the vast majority of people use it for is another.  Every poll I have seen is showing more people playing docked with a pro controller, using it as a console (or both with docked being favored).  It has the ability to further downclock its performance to allow for portability as a feature.

Nintendo advertised a console with hybrid functionality, and delivered just that.

It's a hybrid. It can switch between generations. It also has a dock.

Well baseline PS4 also supports PSVR.

Gens are a bad concept to use at this point. In fact really even in the past gens have been such a nebulous concept, to the point that for example Second generation seems to span 1976–1992, Third generation 1983–2003, Fourth generation 1987–2004. It doesn't really make any sense.

Normally we have compared consoles to consoles and handhelds to handhelds, and tried to lump gens by proximity and tech. Switch is a hybrid which cannibalizes both markets, which makes it hard to compare apples to apples.

Switch is going to fairly neatly fit half it's lifespan during the '8th gen' with PS4/XBONE and half is lifespan during the '9th' gen with PS5/XBX, yet be considered 9th gen?

Other than a few added bits of tech, granted really good tech, like ray tracing and SSD. PS5/XBX are going to be iterative at best and with the XBX at least will be 'backwards compatible', although really it's just maintaining the same kind of compatibility PC games have enjoyed for a long long time. PS5 could be the same. It's like another refresh, like PS4Pro and XBONE X. Unless Nintendo decides to gamble yet again and potentially pull another Wii U, why not just release a Switch New (Switch 2023-24) that is just a bump like the PS4Pro, and XBONE X, forever.

What happens further down the line when more and more of this stuff is in the cloud and all these games, perhaps not Nintendo, can be played on any device with the only restriction in fidelity being how good your internet and screen is?

If we are going to continue to compare devices to devices, lets just drop the gen moniker and compare as is. We currently compare PS4/XBONE/Switch as a group, even if many people consider Switch next gen. And when PS5/XBX release still compare with Switch as well. Focus on launch align trajectory, sales gaps, software attach, etc. Not whether they won a gen or not, but rather if they are winning the this weeks/months sales.

Yes nintendo avertised it as a hybrid, and that's where everyone fell for nintendos lies.

The clockspeeds are software based, and play no part in its definition. The switch can opperate just fine at max speed.

Nintendo could unlock for us them at any moment and the only thing changing would be the battery life.

Also what people use it for the most doesnt matter, if what they use it for is already included within the definition of a handheld.

Handhelds are portable systems. Portable systems are made to guarantee portable usabillity (aka independence)  not to prevent stationary use by definition.

Sure some portable devices may not offer a tv-out type of functionality but that doesnt matter, because they are allowed, but not obliged to provide it.

Portable systems, including handhelds as a specialized form, are defined as

o always offering portable use

o sometimes offering stationary use

Stationary systems are defined as

o always offering stationary use

o never offering portable use

I can see where Nintendo tricked you into believing it's a home console. Because both types have an intersection with stationary use.

But you can easily check what kind of system you have.

If you can "undock" the system, it's a portable device ( Laptop, Handheld, Smartphone, etc.),

if you cannot "undock" the system it's a stationary device (HC, PC, Server, etc.)

The dock does not support the system in doing its core tasks (calculate, render, create, recieving inputs, etc.)

It's only function is to deliver power to the switch and forward the finished picture to the tv and thats nothing exclusive to a gaming system.

(Thus not affecting its definition)

It would take a second gpu/cpu/other core components inside the dock itself to make the switch a hybrid.

Because what all hybrids share is the necessity of having to have 2 or more core task specific sets of hardware.

Example: a hybrid car has both, an internal combustion engine and an electric motor,

because depending on the mode the car is in, it cannot use the other engine.

This does not apply to the switch. Switch uses the same hardware for both modes,

and using the same hardware for both modes is not a switch but a gear shift .

It does? Then scratch that part.

I wasnt entirly sure whether base ps4 does or doesnt and rather than checking it I just assumed that it's just the Pro which does.

In that case, Switch would be the only 9th gen system.

PS4 and XB1 getting owned by the Wii-U is some hilarious revisionism.

I approve.

Hybrid is a bullshit marketing term.

Sure pro have a much better run of VR and also have additional port to make it easier to use VR, but baseline PS4 can play VR.

It doesnt matter what it is...it's going to fall of a cliff and sell negative numbers...