> This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into No, nobody buys a nintendo to do banking on them. I bought a phone since I needed it to d

> This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into No, nobody buys a nintendo to do banking on them. I bought a phone since I needed it to do banking. This is a real difference, not just a marketing distinction. > it’s purely a result of gatekeeper decisions on the part of Nintendo Yes, and that gatekeeper power ensures Nintendo isn't a general purpose device. If they allowed it to be a general purpose device like Apple did with phones then things would be different. Controlling such a major share of general purpose devices like Apple does is a serious issue. Controlling a share of gaming computing like Nintendo doesn't matter nearly as much, so therefore lawmakers aren't going after them to the same degree. It doesn't matter if technically they are the same, in practice one doesn't cause issues for society while the other one does.