People part with $5-10 for a meal at McDonald's that quick, convenient, and consistent. An Apple product costs hundreds or over a thousand dollars, making the consumer think harder about a purchase.
Someone who uses Apple products out of necessity will weigh the pros and cons. Someone who uses Apple products for pedestrian activities and recreation is going to rationalize why Apple products are worth the additional debt. They probably give more thought to what they can afford to eat, or which fast food meal is a better value, than the scrutiny they give to tech brands. And it is a
brand consideration more than it is a product-by-product consideration. I'd wager that most customers choose Apple because it's ecosystem is convenient, consistent, and status quo. I'm also seeing a common explanation for their "loyalty": they are stuck. They are too vested in the ecosystem even if it is losing its luster.
Ask an iPhone X or later owner if they'd buy the same phone without FaceID. Ask an iPad user which productivity features he can't live without. Ask an iWatch owner if the watch improved their fitness or freed them from their phone addiction. When I have, the answers were verbal shrugs. I've gotten better product endorsements from people that use InstaPots.
My whole argument is Apple is a far better company today than before the iPhone, which is why the sales have exploded. They make better stuff now. Give me facts they don't.
Better how? Better engineering that translates into better performance? Like an iMac or MacBook that can only maintain its advertised processor speed for under a minute before it throttles to avoid damage from the heat it produces? As someone cleverly noted, "A faster processor that throttles is no better than a slower one that doesn't."
Better repairability and longevity? You tell me what the data proves.
Better utility? Like a myopic AI assistant that users have to compensate for with scripts?
But you're not concerned about those traits. What you have is adequate for clerical activities, Internet surfing, and grocery lists.
Don't start talking about anecdotal stories, Mac Keyboards, iPad bending, and one off software bugs. Apple sells 300M devices per year and unless they have a Samsung style recall, I don't consider any of them to be show stopping issues...and you shouldn't either.
Which is why, when Apple PR describes an issue as "affecting an insignificant number of users" is actually a significant number of users. If Google sells only 5M devices and has issues with 20 percent, that's newsworthy. If Apple has issues with 1 percent of 100M devices, it's equally newsworthy. Why? Not because the number of defects are equal but how Apple routinely denies an issue's impact and attempts to deflect the problem on the owner. An important part of a brand's reputation is their demonstration of empathy and their willingness to accept responsibility even as an act of charity.
Don't think the Battery Replacement Program had the same breadth as a recall? BatteryGate was an attempt to conceal a handicap. In any event, it proved that Apple is no white hat actor in their industry. They pulled a Bill Clinton (lied) when asked if they throttled older phones. They backpeddled when evidence was found. Their apology and restitution is meaningless. It was nothing but damage control. Going forward, everything they proclaim has to be scrutinized.
