You can't properly compare sales numbers between two products whose major purpose is quite different. Nintendo's products are for gaming only, they serve very little purpose otherwise. Every one of those was sold as a gaming unit. Most people bought their iPhones for purposes other than gaming. Sure, a large number, if not all, of iPhones users play games on their device but that's not a fair comparison since that wasn't always the reason for the sale. The fact that Nintendo has sold so many devices with one purpose as compared to the iPhone which has far more uses is the impressive part to me.
It's close to the same logic that a pirated game equates to a lost sale, which it does not.
I don't think the product's purpose is as relevant as how the product is actually used. If we want to take it to another extreme, I have an iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch as well as a Wii, Playstation and Xbox. Guess which three are used to play games every day and which have not been used for anything in over a year.
What I meant by the piracy analogy is that you are assuming.
I'm not exactly comparing their purposes but the reasons people buy them. To do a proper comparison you would have to ask every single iOS device owner if they bought the thing for games, as the main reason for the purchase, to compare them with a device that is only good for gaming. You cannot assume to compare purchase numbers between two devices if people buy them for different reasons even if some features of the two products overlap.
It's the same comparison that people keep doing with PCs and consoles. Everybody buys a console for gaming (which is slowly changing, granted) while not everyone who buys a PC does so for gaming.
Mostly disagree. For comparison purposes how the device is actually used is much more indicative than what the buyer thought the primary purpose would be at purchase time.
In fact, I think that apple base turned 100-250 million folks into casual gamers is more influential than yet another console.
But it seems to me you are assuming again. You are assuming how they are using the device. With Nintendo's products you are not assuming, you know what they are using it for.
I don't think I'm getting my point across very well. I'm not disputing that a large number of people use their iOS devices for gaming, which is good.
I'm just saying that you cannot necessarily compare two devices on a 1-to-1 basis using sales numbers if the two devices are not comparable 1-to-1 in their usage. The iOS devices are versatile in nature and are suitable for multiple tasks. It's not proper to compare every single sale of an iOS device against every single sale of Nintendo's products. You can make estimates and guesses but I don't feel a 1-to-1 comparison can be made nor be fair.
To make a comparison like this I'd rather know the numbers of game titles sold per device. That comparison works for me because the purpose of buying the game is to play it, nothing else.
I specifically did not make a 1-to-1 relation on sales, instead stating "the number who play games on the device". I subsequently put up a range so large (100-250 million) that it'd be hard to call it an assumption.
