PS1, NES, Gameboy, DS.... The generation winner has generally been the "weaker" console, SNES/Megadrive were the only ones on par with each other (and they both beat down the more powerful competitors at the time)
That said I agree it's not really comparable as the X & S are two versions of the same console, the lower powered version is just a less attractive proposition even at $200 less
I do think the lack of disc-drive is a bigger issue though, even people who have switched to buying their games online like to have the option available... look at PS5 in Japan, the digital edition is only about 1/5th of total sales and I think the only difference with that version is the lack of disc-drive.
Microsoft have clearly overestimated the appeal of the S, just as Nintendo have with the Switch Lite (either that or they are trying to push those models for other reasons)
Each company has a different strategy with their SKUs.
Sony wanted to advertise a lower entry price, but because they are losing a lot more money on the digital PS5, they've significantly limited its production to push people towards the more expensive SKU. It's similar to their PS3 launch strategy where they had a $499 SKU, but they actually don't want it to sell well.
Microsoft wanted an SKU to undercut whatever Sony had planned, but at the same time they took so much out of their Series S that they can afford to produce it in great numbers. IIRC, Phil Spencer went on record that he believed that Series S was going to sell more than Series X lifetime, so yes, Microsoft clearly overestimated demand for a gimped Xbox.
Nintendo's Switch Lite coincided with the 3DS business fizzling out, so it is about securing dominance in a market that nobody else is in anymore. Nintendo didn't want to leave any window open for a competing low-cost portable console. However, they have yet to figure out an appropriate split in the production ratio between the original Switch and the Lite. The former has always been produced in greater numbers, but it still hasn't been sufficient. A notable chunk of the Lite's appeal is the ability to add another Switch to a household, but at this point of Switch's lifecycle there are still so many households which have yet to buy their first Switch, so for now the Lite is mostly about filling the void that the 3DS left.
PS2, Wii and Switch didnt have weaker versions, power wise.
What did you mean by "historically" then?
AFAIK this is the first time there has been a console launch with a power split like this, previously when there have been multiple launch SKUs it has been based on available memory & features.
I am pretty sure that brute is mistakingly piggybacking on Jim Ryan's statement that a strategy like Series X/Series S hasn't succeeded in the past, hence why Sony chose a different path. The obvious catch is that such a strategy has not been employed before as you correctly noted, so using the word "historically" is simply wrong (Ryan used that word). I assume Ryan said it the way he did because it carries the implication that Microsoft is doing bad business, going for something that has never succeeded before.
No matter how much PS4/XBO are selling right now, they are old gen consoles.
The graph literally say "current gen consoles", so they don't belong there.
A while ago, the "Current Gen" graph was listed as "Current Platforms." The reason they did that was because of the confusing argument around whether or not the Switch was 8th gen or 9th gen.
The "Last Generation" tab has all the 7th gen consoles. And the "This Generation" tab has the PS4, Xbox One, and SWITCH. And it's been like that ever since the Switch came out in 2017, replacing the Wii U. Even though the Wii U was Nintendo's actual, real 8th generation console. So really, the Wii U, PS4, and Xbox One all should've been removed once the Switch came out, since the Switch is, by traditional definitions, the first 9th generation console. Yet we kept hearing debates about "Is the Switch 8th gen or 9th gen?"
If it's the latter, then in that case the Switch never belonged on that tab alongside the PS4/Xbox One and those two should've been booted to
"Last Generation" with 7th gen being tossed entirely as soon as the Switch came out and the Switch should've been by itself, even though the PS4 and Xbox One were still in the middle of their life cycles with the PS4 in the middle of its peak year.
If it's the former, then the Switch should be booted along with the PS4 and Xbox One now that the PS5 and XSXS are here since the Switch would also be considered old gen.
So which is it?
The archaic and dated conception of generations is exactly that, archaic and dated.
What's archaic is VGC's website code. The frontpage has to show exactly five consoles, that's why Switch had to replace the Wii U and why the Wii U is nowhere to be seen, that's why the 3DS and Vita have been kept on it despite having no meaningful sales anymore.
This particular VGC staff decision was never about which gen does Switch belong to. It was all about how do they work with the code they've got. But they are finally able to change things, so a new look should be coming soon.