How to Charge $1,000 for Absolutely Nothing
priceonomics.com
priceonomics.com
Compare: http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/humor/ATT_Copyright_true.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage
The sheer "internet"-ness of the idea at the time was brilliant. It also seems like the kind of thing you can only really pull off once. And it was funny watching it slowly fill up, discovering what kind of businesses turned out to spend on something like this, what colours they attempted to choose to stand out, and how the result was a chaotic mess with everyone fighting for attention. Subtle commentary and somewhat prophetic of the current situation with ads...
Some brands (like Apple) invest considerably more in doing things "properly" as opposed to "just enough", and a fairly large and wealthy market exists that is both less price-sensitive, and more quality-sensitive than those who purchase the "just enough".
Especially with the higher quality from RL (e.g. Purple Label), I would say the buyers are more concerned about being certain that the product will be of a good enough quality, and less concerned about the price tag and RL's profit margin.
RL also sells "taste", that is, it is a "safe" choice if you are trying to dress conservatively. This is also monetized.
(I personally would rather go to a tailor at that price point, and I do. This has a fairly heavy knowledge and time cost though.)
It took them decades to get around to letting users resize a window properly. Their maps product was steering people into lakes. They sell a computer that looks like a trash can. I mean, there are plenty of examples to show Apple doing things improperly.
Normal people buy Apple because it's a status symbol, hackers buy Apple because it's Unix and we all know the deal with graphics designers. If it weren't Unix though, nobody here would be using an Apple computer and they'd probably be making fun of how annoying OS X is (well, they still do that but hey, it's Unix!).
"Just enough" isn't a MacBook Pro or even an Air, it's a 3-4 year old machine you pick up for $150 on eBay or maybe that $200 netbook you picked up on a sale at your local supermarket. Could be the machine you got for free when your neighbour updated. This machine can go on the internet, display your emails, show you the occasional movie (and if you're a particularly sharp average user, allow you to download them illegally) without crashing too often. That's the world normal people live in, in the first world. In the third world, a crappy no name 4" Android that takes 30 seconds to load any web page over the local 3G is what you deal with and a branded phablet is "luxury" (and an iPhone is like a Ferrari Italia).
In clothing, "just enough" is Primark or H&M - cheap, replaceable stuff without much thinking behind it. Uniqlo is doing very well because it's offering (much) better quality in that range at the same price point, especially regarding "taste". In cars, it's the Camry or the Accord, which can last a good 20 years with little servicing, gets you from A to B with decent fuel economy, and can be had second hand for a few thousand dollars. Car guys will think that a 3-series is "normal", but it isn't - it's the 5% as seen by those in the 0.5%.
You're conflating brand position and hardware build quality with functionality. Yes, Apple is considered the BMW of computers. But, it's not because the give the user all of the features that they actually need.
Apple is known for skimping on features and options. They'd rather give you one button instead of two and then try and convince you that that choice is actually better somehow. They'd rather leave out a feature that everybody needs than do it in a way that they cannot capitalize on. They make all of their money by selling devices that are mechanically simple as possible because less moving parts cost less to make. Same thing with their software. Less features, less options, easier to maintain...but users are often left without actual features.
You could get the same or higher value for less money by buying a Samsung f.x.