But that only works as long as everyone is at it. As soon as you have one brand that makes a point of not doing anything like that and just providing good quality gear, the market of people with enough money to feature in this part of the discussion has another option they may well prefer. And if people buy Apple gear, no-one is convincing me that such a brand couldn't sell a TV with $1000 hardware specs and no junk at $1200 or even $1500 to that market.

How many such brands exist? Apple is the obvious example, but what else? I can think of only single other one - Framework[0] - but it's pretty niche at the moment, and it's too early to tell how successful it'll be. A mass market brand? Can't think of one.

The problem here is, by not doing this kind of shady shit, which is currently normalized as a business practice, you're leaving lots of money on the table. The temptation to pick it up is strong. Maybe you can resist it, but will your investors? Will your shareholders?

If we could figure out how to resist, in a reproducible way, the market pressure favoring antisocial behavior, the world would be a much better place.

--

[0] - https://frame.work/

> If we could figure out how to resist, in a reproducible way, the market pressure favoring antisocial behavior, the world would be a much better place.

Isn't that what regulation is for? If business practices harm society, then you legally rein in the business, financially discouraging them from committing such practices.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/no-chocolate-or-ice-cre...

https://wwwl.foodnavigator.com/Article/2015/01/07/Netherland...

Yet even Apple is sliding into pay-and-ads with special placement for their own offerings.

I'm not arguing that recent Apple is a business to be emulated here. However its success is clear evidence that if something is shiny enough and has otherwise good specs then there is a large market willing to pay a large premium for the shiny.