Remember, I never said low quality did I ?
And I never implied low cost = bad.
Apple HAS to be low cost in order to sell hundreds of millions of products every year.
The two simply don't go together if you think about it.
If Apple was a HIGH cost brand then most people would not be able to afford to buy their products.
Apple does make nice quality items. Sure I often do not agree with the designs, and what aspects they view as most important, and I will be happy to question many of their choices on design and materials.
But what they do make, they give it a lovely finish, and, to be fair so do many other brands of a similar price point.
I am simply pointing out that, whilst the finish may be nice, and they may be at the upper end price wise of a certain category of product.
The products they make, are made for and priced for the general consumer end of the mass market. Not the lowest price of course, but their aim is mass market.
High end products do not sell in high numbers.
In fact selling in high numbers is a negative point at the upper end.
Our whole concept of have's and have not's is based upon I have something you can't afford, so I feel special.
It's been that way for years.
The moment everyone has one (iPhone) that's destroyed.
No one can logically feel special and exclusive owning an iPhone.
It's true Apple may attempt to artificially inflate the price of a Gold Watch, vastly beyond it's cost to them.
Myself, I see problems in Apple slapping say $3500 of sheer profit on a $1500 watch. Simple because they are not that type of company, and, even if it is expensive ($1500) they are still going to want it buyable, at a push, by enough normal people.