Guys, read up on Thorstein Veblen and conspicuous consumption. It's an about 100 year old economic concept asking for the ratio between the actual use value versus prestige value (for social distinction) of a product. Basically, do you need a car to take you to work, or do you need a car to show off infront of your neighbors. Only, it works much more subtle than that. People will want to belong and this is how the entire western society ends up in debt, totally unneccessary which is the worst part. No wonder China owns all our asses these days.
Apple users will continue to use Macs/Iphones etc for social distinction and to balance their feelings of inferiority towards their peers. And once you bought it, even if you're aware of what's really going on, it's only natural (there even is a study for this) to defend one's decision with "reasoning" even if you bought something useless. Now, Iphones aren't useless, but other brands will do the same trick except the prestige part. Also, what's so different to China when everyone in a social group (students e.g.) use the same product. It only shows that this generation grows up totally adapted. What about individualism if everyone uses the same brand?
Fact is, we live in a commercial society where people happily pay for the right amount of prestige i.e. conspicuous consumption. In so far, Apple has understood how marketing (and people) work extremely well. That's exactly why I despite them and feel pity for Iphone users (many who probably can't even afford to pay for the phone other than in 24 monthly installments) while potentially having no money for rent, healthy food, or the education of their children. Cheers!
