Hey, uh, maybe you shouldn't make a joke about this to a disabled queer minority member. Because I can't begin to tell you how fucked up this type of "joke" is.
First off, I'm going to apologize for upsetting you. Straight up, no qualifications. You're not the only disabled queer person in this conversation, and, in general, I wouldn't say anything online to a stranger that I wouldn't say to anyone - and by that I mean that I would hope that I am taking the same kind of care with everyone that I would take with someone in your - our - position. I am sorry.
Secondly, this was not in any way a joke. I am sorry that it came off as in any way glib. I am saying that people can do the sorts of morally bad things that mean you "should" or "should not" defend them. This a hunk of plastic, and I think it is inappropriate to tell someone that they are not allowed to engage in technical analysis "just saying" using moral terms.
I made what felt like a pretty lukewarm statement. I would like us to talk about technical details like battery life in a relatively unemotional way, because otherwise we do things like criticize Sony for 3 hours of battery life when the Switch launched with 2.5. There are users in this thread - and I'm not referring to you - who are taking Sony to task for battery life while also arguing about performance numbers for REDACTED using Switch's original TDP.
Also, as for the rest of your hostile response, which was completely uncalled for,
I found your initial response to me very hostile, and part of (general to the thread, not specific to you) trend of this thread getting a little console-war-ish, which I think is inappropriate.
I'm sorry if I misread your intentions or tone - I still cannot for the life of me figure out what you were trying to communicate that wasn't emotionally driven in response to a pretty mundane statement on my part. While I found your message counter productive, I'm sorry again that you were the recipient of what I thought of as a response to the conversation over all.
I think you are entitled to any opinion about hardware you like and should feel free to express them. What I think is inappropriate is to police the discourse about what "should" or "should not" be said, especially in response to a lukewarm single sentence statement.
you don't need to double down on your corporate defense stuff in here, please.
I (genuinely) do not understand how you could read "corporate defense" in anything I said.
To be clear, I have no Sony products in my home (that I am aware of), and I am of the political opinion that the existence of a corporations Sony's size are a net evil in the world regardless of their behavior, and that Sony's behavior with things like Intellectual Property and forced labor make them even more egregious, and that specifically Sony makes the gaming industry worse, not better.
The whole product doesn't make any sense to begin with,
Yes, I agree.
especially with how Sony already supports streaming to begin with on third party applications, but to have an exceptionally abysmal battery life for a streaming-only product, there is no defending this.
Again, I'm not defending the product. I am not in Project Q's camp. I think it's a boondoggle.
The Switch launched with an advertised 2.5 hour battery life when playing its launch title, often worse. Sony's clearly targeting living room play. I think that's a dumb decision on their part, but the battery life is consistent with their (misguided, to my mind) product design.
However we judge a product, I would simply like to hold Nintendo and Sony to the same standards.
Having an opinion about Project Q is not something you have to apologize for. I would prefer you apologize for your language toward me, if you're going to apologize at all.
Edited to add: I was gifted a used PS4, which I had forgotten about. It's never been turned on, but I do own, in the spirit of full disclosure