Hacker News Reader

Comment by notesinthefield | Hacker News Reader

Were it not for constantly updated buying guides from tech news sites, Im not sure anyone even Apple employees themselves would know which iPad to recommend to anyone.

View on HN

Studies have shown that when companies present an overwhelming number of choices, consumers often end up spending more. The psychology behind this is rooted in decision fatigue, where consumers are more likely to choose something familiar or assume that a more expensive product is the best choice.

I have always heard of different conclusions from too many choices. It was from a study known as the "Jam Experiment." [0] They found that in a grocery store that if customers had six choices, they bought more jam than if there were 14 choices.

They termed it decision paralysis.

[0] https://scottfenstermaker.com/too-much-choice-the-jam-experi...

The version I'm familiar with was more about driving consumers to a middle-priced version by adding a more expensive version.

Offer version A at $10, and version B at $50, most people pick A.

Offer version A at $10, version B at $50, and version C at $25, most people pick C.

What you're referencing is usually called the decoy effect, which isn't the same as decision paralysis.

Never heard of decoy effect. Always referred to this phenomenon as “anchoring”

> Never heard of decoy effect. Always referred to this phenomenon as “anchoring”

Correct. The example they gave is anchoring.

Anchoring typically looks like $10-$25-$50, and they want you to buy the $25 item. Sometimes the presence of the $50 item can have zero sales, but the $25 item will sell better than if the options were just $10 and $25.

Decoy would be more like $10-$40-$50, and they want you to buy the $50 item and the $40 item has less than it’s sticker value. Decoy is commonly used to encourage people to buy at the top of their budget range (as one example).

Reminds me of Apple’s pricing scheme

Personally, when presented with too many choices, I always feel like some of the choices are the wrong ones - perhaps the cheap ones are garbage, or quite oppositely, you're paying an extra for nothing - and I'm afraid of being a fool for picking them.

No matter how it goes, it's always a negative experience for me.

Interesting. A while ago I looked at laptops and when I looked at Dell and Lenovo I couldn't figure out how to choose between all the models (dozens or probably hundreds). Ended up with a Framework laptop.

Ah, psychology.

Pretty sure that worked on me. I waited for the iPhone SE 4 (now called the 16E), then when I saw the feature set for the price, just went for the vanilla 16. This was while I was knowing exactly how the 16E was acting as a price anchor to move me to the next tier.

For a long time, Apple’s line up included an under powered option that’s too cheap to run well, an over-powered over-priced option with features most people don’t need, and a Goldilocks version.

Yes, the expensive version anchors the price higher, but it always felt like a gift, in that they had picked the middle version that balanced performance and price already.

This might apply to perishable consumer goods like soap and shampoo, which are cheap and have perfect substitutes. I don't think it would apply to expensive durable goods where more time and research goes into the purchase decision, and there are no perfect substitutes.

Do not be addicted to metrics. Steve Jobs would tell you that while you might help profits in the short term, you're undermining the long term product experience. Don't sound like an executive whose compensation is tied to profit metrics. That is not the only form of success just because it's the most measurable. Measurability does not necessarily equate to most impact.

Isn't it just a "price laddering" strategy.

Where you make the prices of a maxed out lower tier product be more expensive than a barebones higher tier, so it incentives you to "ladder up" your product choice.

Best explained by MKBHD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiNYOZZLOyg

I think I'm just going to fatigue myself back to my old Android phone and ancient iPad (of some sort) from the last decade...

"Studies" like what?

'The paradox of choice' says the exact opposite. When presented with more jams to sample, more groceries shoppers stopped to try, but less actually bought. Reducing decisions is conversion 101.

Reminds me of when Steve cut all the numerical suffixes from the product line and drew the grid:

               home   work
    
    portable  iBook | PowerBook
              -----------------
     desktop   iMac | PowerMac

And in 2010 before Jobs passed there was already the MacBook, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro for laptops

And for desktops, the Mac Mini, iMac and MacPro.

For phones, Apple was selling the 3G, 3GS, and iPhone 4.

For iPods, they were selling the Shuffle, Nano, regular iPod and the iPod Touch.

So selling three regular iPads and the Mini is nothing different now.

All the products except maybe the 3G/3GS are clearly differentiated. What is new is having several iPads that are nearly indistinguishable from each other without Apple's comparison tool.

How can you tell the difference between the 3G and 3GS except for speed?

Do you know off the top of your head the difference between the MacBook and MacBook Pro at the time? Would you have known then?

Jobs passed the day the iPhone 4S was released and they were selling the 3GS, 4 and 4S. I’m sure he had something to do with the lineup. The 4 and the 4S were indistinguishable from the outside and the 4S and was only faster.

As far as iPads…

iPad - $350, slowest processor, worse screen of the three iPads

iPad Air - $799, higher price, faster processor (M3), more memory, better screen (anti reflective coating), choice of larger screen

iPad Pro - $1199, higher price, better screen with higher refresh rate and slightly higher resolution, better processor (M3 vs M4), better camera, faster USB C, Face ID, better speakers.

The MacBook and MacBook Pro used to be immediately distinguishable from each other because one was made of plastic, and the other was aluminum. I'm not suggesting it should've remained that way, but it was clear to the consumer which one was which. The Air/Pro laptop lineup is still rather distinct to this day.

I won't defend how fragmented the iPhone lineup has gotten around the 3GS/4/4S, but the iPad is much worse, because again it's not immediately obvious which one is better without a comparison tool.

And the iPad Pro and iPad Air is distinguishable by TouchID vs FaceID and a better screen and smaller bezels. By looks, how are you suppose to tell the difference between two all screen devices?

The iPad Pro vs iPad Air seem distinguishable from each other, yes, but there's the iPad (A16) and mini muddying the lineup.

For example, the mini costs more than A16 iPad yet lacks a landscape center stage camera — but also has features the even more expensive Air doesn't, like true tone flash on the 12MP camera.

The iPad lineup is a mess, and spending more money can lead to getting less features. The iPhone lineup is pretty messy too, but the iPad situation is particularly terrible, and sales peaked years ago.

You can look at the Mini and tell whether you want a smaller iPad. Miniaturization has come at a premium forever.

And would you propose that Apple doesn’t offer a cheap iPad for bulk purchases and kids? A lot of computing devices are the same externally and distinguished by slower processors and less internal features.

I would propose a lineup where spending more money won't result in less features.

Between the iPad -> iPad Air -> iPad Pro, which one gives you less features as you spend more?

Why exclude the mini when it's part of the lineup?

I don't really see the value proposition for the iPad Pro. It's got powerful hardware, but I can't imagine myself doing any heavy work on a tablet.

People write comments like this often and I'm always wondering if they are just expressing that the device isn't for them or they don't think the device is for anybody.

There are so many devices out there that you can probably find the perfect thing for you. For some of us, the iPad Pro is a great choice.

Most of the people I see making the comments are round-about asking "what can I use to justify getting this, I want one."

I still feel that way about iPads in general, I keep wanting (and even buying) them, but never really do anything with them that I can't do with my phone.

@cridell - I think people write comments like this because, like me, they are trying to envision using the device as a replacement for the laptop...or as an additional augment and come up short. I know I do.

And for all that hardware it is disappointing that there are so many things it cannot do that you can do on MacOS and its really hard to envision what you can do.

My last ipad which admittedly was a v1 gathered dust. I really want a pro for whiteboarding...but gosh, its a lot to spend on a whiteboard....someone help me justify it as a PM.

OLED display.

There's also people who work in Procreate with a million layers and need all the horsepower and RAM they can get.

I guess OP's question is: If you need a million layers, and gigantic amounts of CPU and RAM, why aren't you working on a desktop workstation? I also had a hard time believing there's a real niche that tablets fill, but hey, they've been with us for years, so clearly somebody's buying them.

People sometimes don't like to be working on creative stuff sitting on a workstation all the time, having hardware that allows to do it on-the-go, or easily move to other places can help to spark something.

For purely technical editing a workstation is probably unbeatable but if you need to find inspiration there's very few things less inspiring than sitting on the same desk, within the same environment, day-in and day-out.

maybe because of the tight integration of the pencil with the display? You don't get that on a desktop device, even with a separate tablet.

I think it's probably aimed at people using them to create digital art.

100%. It's a powerhouse for drawing.

The iPad and Surface are *everywhere* in education and healthcare. Just yesterday I donated blood on a mobile health unit entirely ran on iPads and verizon hotspots. Every k-12 and some high ed sysadmins can tell you about having to manage iPads and JAMF at some point.

It is much nicer tho than generic one. Hard to explain how.

Great for artists, mostly useless for developers

Well, Apple employees can’t work remotely :) But if you do, and you like working outside your house, the cheapest 10+-inch M-series model you can get is the answer. With Sidecar, it’s at minimum a wireless external display everywhere you go.

At this new model’s cost, it’s hard to recommend. But it does make last year’s M2 models (and older M1 models) more sensible for this purpose.

It's not that complicated, there's basically 3 iPads. iPad, iPad Air, iPad Pro. Good, Better and Best. The Mini is a niche product that you buy if you need a smaller iPad.

The famous "four quadrant" product matrix expanded to "Good, Better, Best" across most their product line towards the ends of Job's era. Airpods/Pro/Max. Apple Watch SE/10/Ultra. iPhone 16e/16/Pro (with some size variations).

I keep seeing people saying it's complicated but it's really not.

Even during the Jobs era there was a good/better/best inside of there. The first iMac had good/better/best configs. It's just that Apple became so big that the best sometimes became a completely different machine, with its own good/better/best!

if( price sensitive ) return iPad; else if( know what you're doing and you know it needs a Pro ) return iPad Pro; else // I guess I'll be browsing and watching movies?? return iPad Air;

Reply on news.ycombinator.com