>If a product is expensive, big, ugly, unreliable, or difficult to use, it is >clearly inferior.
inferior for whom? my point was that the factors you cite above are more salient for the average person's decision-making, whereas the decision-making of most of this thread's discussants would be primarily based on technological coolness. therefore, the discussants' notions of inferiority or superiority are not generalizable to the preferences of the public at large.
as far as the k6, does the fact that it doesn't have an intel badge make it an inferior product? it would seem so, since both consumers and corporate purchasing depts (both are horribly set in their conservative ways) will never go near anything that doesn't say intel inside.
the point is the k6 does not have a bright future. using your argument, it will die because it will be an "inferior product," because of ancillary factors such as advertising, brand recognition, whatever. using my argument, it will die despite being a possibly superior product, but not having the brand recognition to back it up. either way, intel wins. :-) |
