Now your argument seems to be that regardless of what they do, profitability is no way related? They're profitable because they make products that people like and buy. If they weren't profitable it would because people don't like their products and don't buy them. I'd say that's rather significant.

I agree with the "buy" part: that's obviously necessary for them to be profitable. Not so sure about the "like" part.

There are many reasons to buy or not buy a product apart from liking it.

You could buy it because that's what's used at work, or because that's what all your friends have, or because they have a monopoly on interfacing with other products you need to use (like games, or photoshop, or tax or music software), or because that's what you've been using all along and it's just too much of a pain to switch, or just because the product is marketed so well that you feel the need to buy it without having any sort of clue as to whether you'll like after you've bought it (or any sort of clue as to how good the competition is).

But most of those are statistically insignificant or temporary. Apple has sold millions of iPhones, for example, year after year.

You sound like you are desperate to make a negative point about Apple without actually having something meaningful to add to the discussion.

As for not adding anything to the discussion, the same could be said about your own comments. Or you could also be accused of being "desperate to defend Apple".

But I wouldn't accuse you of that because I don't think that's a very constructive way of having a discussion.

Really? So you think the overriding reason that people buy a product has nothing to do with whether they like it? Because that's the argument you seem to be making. I'm not desperate to defend Apple, I'm desperate to defend logic and common sense.

Honestly, I have no idea what point you were trying to make on this little aside to my original comment.