> they would have to find the profit maximizing price and quantity You're only concerned about profits for the shareholders, which i explicitly don't care abou

> they would have to find the profit maximizing price and quantity You're only concerned about profits for the shareholders, which i explicitly don't care about (or rather, i care against). I'm interested in the interests of the people, which is structurally at odds with the profits of the 1%. > By definition this means that single product will have too many features and too expensive for some people Nope, as someone else pointed out, if there were consumer protection regulations against such practices, you'd just have the best camera for the cheapest price. Because i strongly doubt the manufacturer would sell any model at a loss, which would anyway be illegal in certain jurisdiction (eg. France) as part of anti-monopoly regulations. > So instead they make multiple products with different functionality so that people can decide. People empower people. Corporations empower shareholders. Our class interests are not aligned (in fact, they are opposite). It's very rare (if possible at all) to see a private corporation doing something to empower people, except maybe for worker-operated coops (which are not driven by shareholders' profits but by their passion or the interests of their users).