I'm saying that creating a premium product cannot be distilled down to one feature/dimension/characteristic and it's a fruitless task to just ask people on the internet to do it for you.

1) Many people can't specifically identify and articulate which characteristics lead them to prefer one product over another.

2) Many people have different reasons for preferring the same product over the same alternative

3) An individual is probably preferring a set of characteristics that overdetermines their preference (i.e. if you remove one of the set, their preference still doesn't change) and the set is comprised of individually not-very-important characteristics.

Would you be confused if someone said that they prefer a Porsche Panamera over a Honda Civic? They could probably say they prefer the size of the Panamera, but that's clearly not sufficient explanation because they also would prefer it over a CR-V. Then they'd say the materials used are better. But would they now accept a CR-V with the interior redone in ultra-premium materials? Very unlikely.

The reality is that their preference is a complex mixture of things that they struggle to even detect never mind articulate. "Good product companies" get this, and bad product companies just stare in befuddlement at why their CR-V with fancy leather isn't outcompeting Porsche. Of course when you ask someone to explain their preference, they cannot. They don't have the language to describe it! It's a silly question to even ask!

So..Suckers. Got it.

Sure! I hope "other people are idiots" is a helpful model for you.

I find much more value in the view that a great product is the confluence of millions of tiny, apparently inconsequential decisions. It seems completely believable that if the product developers are successful, I as the consumer would struggle to reverse engineer what all of those decisions are by looking at the finished product.

No. seriously -- your absolutely content-free justification of a great product implies, e.g. that crack dealers are great developers of a great product. I legitimately find this sort of after the fact justification not just bad, but dangerous.

But it's not after the fact. Go talk to someone at Apple and they will tell you before the fact how much work goes into the tiny little details. But you're asking users why, and the answer is how could they possibly know? Either everyone is an idiot and you're somehow not hitting a trillion dollar market cap with that knowledge, or the company is doing something very subtle that adds up in ways that are not articulable by laypeople [0].

Not sure what analogy you're getting at with crack. Separate from the moral valence you're trying to ascribe to it, of course it's a great product in some respects. Though I'd suggest that explaining why a single molecule that interacts ~directly with the brain's reward system is a "good product" is much easier than something like a smartphone or car.

[0] One example I happen to know about had to do with the really complex machining that was required on one of the iPhones (forget which) to make the bevel around the screen bezel wrap around the corner in a way that felt (but was not actually) "flat" relative to the straight-line parts of the bevel. Without this multi-axis beveling, which was apparently a complete nightmare to figure out how to manufacture, the corners would've "seemed" sharper. Does that mean someone would pick up an iPhone and remark how nice it is that the corner bevel rotates another 3 degrees or whatever? Obviously not. Does that mean this was a complete waste of time? No one knows. Apple's market cap, margins, adoption, and consumer loyalty point toward them doing something uniquely right though.

Views like the ones you are expressing are dangerous and bad for the world, and I hope you grow to understand that.

The ability that you have to equate affinity/addiction to "good/quality" is downright creepy, and sadly symptomatic of literally the worst bits of all of technology.

If you're operating in real life like this, please stop.

Errr what?

"Good product," at least in English, generally means "a product that people successfully and happily use for its intended purpose." It doesn't usually mean "a product that does good in the world." There are plenty of very good products that don't do good things in the world. If you're operating in real life as if these are inseparable features of an object, please stop.

Well, I suppose you can carry on. Again, if it's useful for you to believe everyone else is an idiot and that, now, good product == product that does good, go ahead. I think this is a very low-resolution picture of reality though, and is probably the source of some of your confusion.

I'm not here to "be correct about somebody's particular definition of words," I'm here to try to get people to make better decisions and actions in the world.

It is absolutely the case that the definition you are using can serve as a technically correct one. But that's not very important. What is important is that real people are being harmed by exploitative technology, and you handwaving that away as if it should be a dismissable part of the conversation is you doing a bad thing.

I’m not handwaving that away lol. You asked whether people could explain why they prefer iPhone over Android. We’re far afield from the point that I (thought?) I was replying to, so I’ll wrap it up here. Have a good weekend!