It's not accurate to describe the average consumer as being in the thousand dollar phone market. They are premium products, and not one that the average consumer can afford. That's one reason why Apple's phone global market share wavers around 10-15%.
Not everyone buying an iPhone today is buying a current, model (carriers are selling back to the iPhone 8), even if they are the base iPhone 11 is about $700 not $1000, and even flagship models are often bought on promotion with steep discounts (AT&T has one with, in the right circumstances, a $700 discount on the 11 Max Pro, bringing it to around $400 on the promo.)
> Ok, 3.5" headphones are objectively: cheaper,
Perfect, I have no money.
> simpler mechanically,
That's nice I guess
> more reliable,
Neat
> easier to use,
Oh yeah I can just plug it in, easy.
> easier to connect to different devices,
Yeah I can just plug it into those, lots of stuff has that sound hole.
> never run out of battery or require charging,
that's true, plus I couldn't use them while they're charging, so if I forget it's a big issue.
> you can't lose 1/3 of them,
That is something that could happen.
> and oh, yeah, they tend to sound better at the same price point.
I'm no audiophile so I'd probably spend less to still get a decent pair.
> A set of Shure SE315s will blow AirPods Pro out of the water on sound quality and noise isolation.
$300 is pricey for mini-speakers
> Yes, wireless headphones are wireless. That's all though.
They play noises too I've heard.
> None of this makes AirPods Pro a platform.
Okay.
> They're neat wireless headphones. Among the best wireless headphones probably. But that's still all they are.
Okay.
I guess my point is we can make up any kind of person, call them and average consume and present them with thoughts and opinions that match our own.
Your comment was nothing but dismissal under the name of 'an average consumer'
Yours, Average Consumer
Isn't it also almost like discussing the average consumers is a way to consciously limit the scope of the discussion so that it isn't about some <1% of the world's population?
Did you mean for "Average Consumer" just to be your name? Because an average consumer certainly did not pay $1000 for their phone. Already here you represent an outlier.
> What about that horrible wire? It gets tangled in my pocket and I rip my headphones out when I run.
About 20% of Americans engage in activities like running or jogging. Again, you're an outlier.
> I only have one device.
https://www.cisco.com/c/m/en_us/solutions/service-provider/v...
I can't say for sure that you're an outlier hear because these figures represent a mean and not a median. I'm taking "the average consumer" to mean "the median consumer" because "the mean consumer" doesn't exist.
> I charge my AirPods Pro every few days. This is a non-issue.
https://www.ifpi.org/downloads/Music-Listening-2019.pdf
Again, I'm not sure that you are an outlier here because of averages vs medians.
If you spend 18 hours per week just listening to music, If even half of that is spent listening to music from your only device, you'll be charging your airpods at least twice a week.
If airpods are additionally used for calls, some two hours a day, you'll have to charge them even more often.
If AirPods are an ubiquitous platform for augmented hearing, "adding context" to what you hear, you'll be charging them at least twice a day.
I should have made it clear that I am in Australia. AU$1k ≈ US$700.
This seems promising, in case anyone has an account: https://www.statista.com/statistics/283334/average-smartphon...
> I don’t care. I’ll pay for convenience. This phone was a thousand dollars!
The average US smartphone consumer is paying like $500 (substantially less anywhere outside of North America) and saying their limit is substantially less than even that, if you look at both actual average price data and surveys of what consumers say they are willing to pay, so (1) not buying a $1000 phone, (2) not aware of how much they are actually paying for a phone, and (3) not as willing to pay extra for convenience as you suggest.
I'm happy I can easily use my headphones with a 9mm plug on my crappy work laptop as well
> Ok, 3.5" headphones are objectively: cheaper,
I don’t care. I’ll pay for convenience. This phone was a thousand dollars!
> simpler mechanically,
Why would I know or care?
> more reliable,
You may have a point here, but the convenience of wireless overrides this for me.
> easier to use,
What about that horrible wire? It gets tangled in my pocket and I rip my headphones out when I run.
> easier to connect to different devices,
I only have one device.
> never run out of battery or require charging,
I charge my AirPods Pro every few days. This is a non-issue.
> you can't lose 1/3 of them,
But I mangle the wire on my old headphones all the time, so this feels like a fair trade-off.
> and oh, yeah, they tend to sound better at the same price point.
I’m neither an audiophile nor particularly price conscious.
> A set of Shure SE315s will blow AirPods Pro out of the water on sound quality and noise isolation.
I’ve never heard of those and wouldn’t know where to buy them.
> Yes, wireless headphones are wireless. That's all though.
This is such a naive statement. I’m sorry, but it totally ignores everything that Average Consumer wants.
> None of this makes AirPods Pro a platform.
Not yet.
> They're neat wireless headphones. Among the best wireless headphones probably. But that's still all they are.
Once you’ve tried a pair of truly great wireless headphones you’ll never go back.
Yours, Average Consumer