4 ms·

> It suggests that the iPhone wouldn't be able to hold its own in a market where interoperability with Android was easier It is just a statement of the obvious

> It suggests that the iPhone wouldn't be able to hold its own in a market where interoperability with Android was easier It is just a statement of the obvious. Price tends to trump every other consideration, unless the difference is pretty big. See also airline ticket pricing and the race to the bottom in comfort & features. If there is no differentiator, a lot of people will just get Android phones because they cost less. They'll put up with quite a lot of abuse as long as they save a few bucks. It'd probably end up like gmail.

Wowfunhappy 2y ago
> It is just a statement of the obvious. Price tends to trump every other consideration, unless the difference is pretty big. But, huge swaths of the public regularly pay much more than the minimum required to have better: • Cars • Clothing • Restaurants • Theater seats These are just the first few that come to mind. Now, is the difference between high- and low-end clothing "pretty big"? I guess it depends on what you mean, but both will fundamentally cover your body. For airlines, people just want to get from point A to point B, and nothing else really matters at the end of the day. Even on higher end airlines, flying is unlikely to be a truly pleasant experience, unless maybe you pay almost an order of magnitude more for first class or something. People just want to get it over with. I mean, I think we're saying the same thing here. But whereas I feel you're framing this as a "bug" in how consumers operate, I think they're behaving quite logically. People will pay more for things they actually care about. When they don't care, they choose the cheapest option.
- realusername 2y ago
  That's exactly why both Apple and Google needs to be opened up. Cars, clothing and restaurants do compete on the offering.
pmarreck 2y ago
But this is just stupidity. Sorry, let me rephrase: This is appealing to the lowest common denominator and the most ignorant consumer.

Wowfunhappy 2y ago

> It is just a statement of the obvious. Price tends to trump every other consideration, unless the difference is pretty big. But, huge swaths of the public regularly pay much more than the minimum required to have better: • Cars • Clothing • Restaurants • Theater seats These are just the first few that come to mind. Now, is the difference between high- and low-end clothing "pretty big"? I guess it depends on what you mean, but both will fundamentally cover your body. For airlines, people just want to get from point A to point B, and nothing else really matters at the end of the day. Even on higher end airlines, flying is unlikely to be a truly pleasant experience, unless maybe you pay almost an order of magnitude more for first class or something. People just want to get it over with. I mean, I think we're saying the same thing here. But whereas I feel you're framing this as a "bug" in how consumers operate, I think they're behaving quite logically. People will pay more for things they actually care about. When they don't care, they choose the cheapest option.

realusername 2y ago
That's exactly why both Apple and Google needs to be opened up. Cars, clothing and restaurants do compete on the offering.

pmarreck 2y ago

But this is just stupidity. Sorry, let me rephrase: This is appealing to the lowest common denominator and the most ignorant consumer.