I agree on the point they won't want to split their software up majorly between drake and OG, but at same time, that doesn't mean they won't slowly over a certain period, phase out 1st party support for the OG and then focus solely on the drake model.
Nintendo literally has half a dozen options for post-Drake.
Nintendo could phase out OG
switch over time converting Drake to the primary platform, and soft transition between gens
Nintendo could ship Drake with really pathetic clocks, limited battery life, targeted as a SteamDeck competitor, and in 2025 launch a “real” Switch 2 that is Drake with a die shrink, better clocks, and a 1080p VRR/HDR screen, but make cross gen games with Pro but not Classic
Nintendo could launch Pro, decide it was an architectural misstep, and pivot entirely for next gen.
They could decide it was architecturally brilliant but that they want two hardware lines again, and make next gen a home console that uses the same arch, allowing software teams to use a unified tool set
Or or or.
Switch was an unusual console, it’s not been since the OG Xbox that someone built a console with mostly off the shelf parts. But it was an architectural dead end, with Maxwell not having a modern feature set. Drake gives them the option to try a new hardware arch without breaking console gens, and let’s them use the huge power jump to solve backwards compat with the Switch library and let that solution mature.
Drake can have been worth the R&D purely by having Pro break even no matter what they do after.