What I'm getting at is it's all marketing garbage. You really don't want console makers putting out "lesser" versions when it comes to core hardware (basically proc/gpu/ram)...locked-in hardware has always been a strong point of consoles but they've obviously decided they want to force the issue. Why? It's pure marketing to try and get console sales out of the loss leader bracket quicker, if not instantly, by using a cheap(er) to buy and make console to justify the price on the more expensive one they know most are going to go for.
If you remember, release price of the XBox One was $499 and sales were garbage, so it was quickly reduced. No need to keep the price low now, though, seeing as there's an even cheaper version. Don't want to pay? Get the cheap one, son! It's strictly there for price justification, no more, no less. It's not good for console gamers, IMO. It also muddies the waters of game development as the hardware gutting is significant. Significant enough, in fact, that I wouldn't be surprised at all if they'll now be making a profit off both of the low and high end versions instead of losing on just the one.
And it's laughable that they're using 1440p as a benchmark for the low end version too, seeing as you're not going to find a run-of-the-mill living room TV from a big box store that natively runs at that resolution; it's going to be 1080p or 4K, so it's a moot point if your TV is native 4k because now you're introducing scaling in to the mix. A lot of people are going to have no idea what I'm talking about but us long time PC gamers know all about what is and isn't important.
It's a shame console gamers are going to have to deal with it more and more, too. Consoles shouldn't be coming with core hardware design compromises...and that's coming from PC Master Race nerd. But yes, I'll agree to disagree.