Generally speaking, people are still devoted to buying Apple products just because the company's name is painted on it and Sony still harbors customer trust even though many of its products don't stand up to its competitors
But why are Sony and Apple so different? Sure, those companies do make nice products, but the iPod isn't that great and the only devices that I would recommend from Sony are the company's HDTVs and camcorders.
I think this analysis is spot-on regarding Sony. They make OK products, but nothing of theirs is actually best.
But when it comes to Apple, the argument completely falls apart. The Apple brand is indeed spectacular, and easily the most valuable brand in the technology industry. Indeed, the only other brands at all that I can think of as having comparable value are Disney, Coke, and McDonalds. Having said that, iPods don't sell simply because they're what everyone else buys. They are actually really highly-rated products, and competitive on price. There's no competing player that can absolutely be called "better." For certain people with a specific need not met by Apple, there are players better-suited to them, but I think it's safe to say that an iPod really, truly is the best player for most buyers. If this article were true, you'd be able to say something like, "Everyone in the know knows that Nomad Jukebox players are the best, but the lemmings just buy iPods anyway." Only you can't, because iPods are in fact great, and most of the competition is just awful.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |