It doesn't mean that the people who choose the iPhone are sheep, or don't understand what they want. It means that the iPhone has some kind of appeal that you don't understand. Rather than claiming that something is "basically" something else, I'd recommend taking the time to understand why it's actually different, then applying those lessons to the products you develop.
I say this because he's right, from a technical perspective the iPhone is "basically" just another smartphone. The guts are the same, the form factor is essentially the same. Hell, at this point even the feature sets of iOs and Android are basically the same.
So yes, there are reasons why people choose to buy an iPhone. But the only real "lesson" I see at this point is that brand names and advertising work...
Secondly, you're looking at speeds & feeds, and not the design of the thing. It's the best designed phone in the market in terms of look, heft, hand feel, not even beginning to get into the UX of iOS. These are little things, but they matter to people, and they're not easily quantifiable on a data sheet.
Sure the first generation iPhone was just hands down better than the competition at the time, but it's not anymore.
Claiming that the look, heft, and hand feel are better is ridiculous, all of them are subjective opinions that vary widely among users (Take me for example, I really like the slate and glass look, but since I have big hands I dislike the heft and hand feel.)
Further, the thing is running a new version of the OS, so when you talk about the UX of iOS 6, what you're really saying is that you believe (based on previous Apple iOS releases) that they will create a good user experience. That's branding.
And I want to stop and state: branding isn't bad. If you've had a previous version of a product and you LIKED it, it's entirely reasonable to assume a future release is also something you'd like. but that doesn't make the device any better or worse, it just makes you more likely to buy it.
And finally, yes I agree that Apple has carefully curated their ecosystem so it seems clean and polished. But it's not any richer (my opinion is that it's considerably less rich since it's so heavily curated, but again that's opinion). MOST importantly though, the ecosystem has little to do with the device itself, that same ecosystem could exist around any device (and does exist around older iPhones).
It's no more ridiculous than people saying they prefer the look, heft, and feel of a BMW or Benz vs. a Ford Taurus SHO.
> when you talk about the UX of iOS 6, what you're really saying is that you believe (based on previous Apple iOS releases) that they will create a good user experience. That's branding.
Yes, I agree that's branding, but that wasn't what I was referring to. I was talking about the UX of iOS in general vs. most versions of Android or WinMo. Admittedly, Android 4.x has gotten much better.
> the ecosystem has little to do with the device itself, that same ecosystem could exist around any device (and does exist around older iPhones)
But again, you're splitting a difference that doesn't exist anymore. There's not "just a device".. the whole reason Apple justifies their large margins is that they're selling an integrated experience of device, software, and cloud services.
Yes, it could exist around any device, but it's sort of like saying "anyone with a hot tub and sauna can be a 5-star spa". Those are devices, they're not just about the design of the experience in totum. To suggest this is just marketing and branding is to dismiss design as mere polish and ornament rather than "how something works end-to-end".