I agree with you to some point that Apple's focus on quality has played a large part in their success. However, an equally large amount has been due to heavy branding/advertising of Apple as the superior, luxury brand. This influences people's feeling of the device more than the difference between constantly running at 60fps or sometimes dropping to 50fps.
Apple users are willing to pay for this. It is comparable to paying €1000 for a handbag. People often justify that it is worth it by pointing out the superior quality of an LV bag, which is true, but it wouldn't matter much to them if the brand wasn't known at all.
You're talking about the percentage of consumers who use price as a signal for quality. I'd agree this happens, but for the signal to exist in the first place the quality must usually be there. If Apple hadn't focused on the quality of their products first, no amount of branding would have put them in this position.
Again, I have to heavily disagree with your post. It's far too easy to simply dismiss Apple's success as one of shrewd marketing. It's way too easy to simply wave Apple off as expensive baubles for image-conscious, vain consumers.
> "but it wouldn't matter much to them if the brand wasn't known at all."
But yet, it would. Consumers can feel quality when they come upon it. The LV bag without the luxury branding would still be far more successfully than a bag of lesser-quality and equally nameless brand.
Going back to what I started mentioning with the last post - a product is perceived at 3 levels. Visceral, behavioral, and reflective. We've already covered the visceral part.
Behavioral is the actual function of the product. How quickly does the kettle boil water? Does that teapot drip when poured? Does my phone actually send the SMS or will it leave me in limbo with no confirmation?
Reflective is the higher, consciously engaging aspect of the product. Does it make me look good to my peers? Does it bring back memories of a bygone era? Does it appeal to my ego? etc etc.
You're positing the Apple's claim to success can be largely accounted for via the reflective angle - whereas I'm saying it's impossible to be successful on that angle alone. A truly legendary product is wildly successful at all 3, and executing on all 3 is what has powered Apple's meteoric rise.
Android in its current state really nails behavioral, but it's half-assing visceral, and the reflective is practically non-existent.
Not from your post, but to aggregate my reply. To the mention that Android shouldn't be playing Apple's game by Apple's rules. These aren't Apple's rules. These are time-tested rules consumers will apply to any product they come across.
Apple users are willing to pay for this. It is comparable to paying €1000 for a handbag. People often justify that it is worth it by pointing out the superior quality of an LV bag, which is true, but it wouldn't matter much to them if the brand wasn't known at all.