
The Age of Unjustifiable Consumerism - design7
https://newark1.com/iphone-7-wireless-consumerism-marketing
======
curun1r
> It goes beyond filling a need or desire and exists purely as evidence of the
> power of advertising to convince us to buy almost anything.

No, it exists as evidence of trying to be happy by craving material
possessions. We believe that they'll make us happy, but all they really
provide is temporary relief from our cravings and then more misery once the
craving reasserts itself. It's a cycle that never leads to actual happiness.

Advertising does create demand, but it plays upon people's existing
dissatisfaction with their lives. It only works because so many people are so
unhappy. If more people were better connected with other people and able to
live in the moment, advertising would be less effective.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Advertising does create demand, but it plays upon people 's existing
> dissatisfaction with their lives. It only works because so many people are
> so unhappy._

It's not just that. It _amplifies_ peoples' dissatisfaction. Brings it to
focus, in order to convince them that the advertised product will help. It
keeps telling people that they will be happier if they buy, and then it tells
them what to buy.

> _If more people were better connected with other people and able to live in
> the moment, advertising would be less effective._

Yeah, if more people would be able to resist the impact of huge armies of
highly trained, highly paid professionals, with access to state-of-the-art
research in psychology, sociology and economics, who also can leverage
resources of huge multinational corporations... Yeah, if each of one
individually could only resist that, we'd all be fine.

------
pmyjavec
Funnily enough I was in Berlin not so long ago, and I stayed with some
students who don't even own smart phones and they live very happy, healthy
lives.

They believe smart phones are a major threat to their privacy and wallet so
they just don't bother with them at all. They just don't actually need them.

It's had me thinking for sometime now whether or not I actually needed a AUD
$1000+ smart phone, when I first purchased one it was only society that told
me I needed one, no one else.

Food for thought.

~~~
k-mcgrady
That's interesting about the students. Were they geeks? Also was it definitely
a case of 'we don't want them' or was that just a cover for 'we can't afford
them'?

~~~
paulasmuth
Speaking for myself: Berlin has a special kind of poor-is-sexy culture and
this would not be too unusual. Lived there for 4yrs, most of them without a
smartphone (had a 20eur burner phone for communication and to receive
monitoring alerts). Had an absolute blast and didn't feel like I was missing a
thing.

~~~
yodsanklai
I had the opposite experience when I moved to the US (coming from Europe). It
struck me how people consumed more of everything. Tech gadgets, food... I
think in Europe we are a bit more defiant toward consumerism, esp. in more
educated environments (but we're catching up!).

It reminds me of a cool classic sci-fi movie about consumerism. John
Carpenter's "They Live". I watched it as a kid but it started to make sense
later.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_Live](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_Live)

"Nada quickly discovers the sunglasses have unique properties: they reduce the
colors of the world around him to black and white and allow him to see that
media and advertising hide omnipresent subliminal totalitarian commands to
obey, consume, reproduce, and conform. They also make clear that many people
in positions of wealth and power are actually humanoid aliens with skull-like
faces."

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> "It struck me how people consumed more of everything. Tech gadgets, food...
I think in Europe we are a bit more defiant toward consumerism"

Obviously it depends where you are in Europe. In the UK I'd say we're a lot
more towards the American end of consumerism but they still take it much
further. Food is the biggest jump for me. I still remember my first time in
America and I was out for dinner. My friend suggested we split a meal as the
portions were large. I still couldn't finish mine (and I eat quite a lot) and
she brought home a doggie bag with enough food for two other people. And this
was quite a nice restaurant too where I'd have expected smaller portions.

------
Pica_soO
Consumerism is good, if it binds for limited ressources great amounts of
consumer time.In this time, the consumer does not spend, the consumer does not
buy, the consumer does not destroy. Minecraft is a great example for
destructive consumerism. Selling a game for 10 $ which would take a large part
of the audience for up to five years partially out of the game industry
market.

------
yodsanklai
I find it crazy that so many people are willing to pay so much for iphones.
There are _much_ cheaper phones that offer pretty much the same features,
certainly a little less polished but very usable. I know people for whom an
iphone is a huge expense but they didn't consider the cheaper alternatives.
Apple really did an awesome job marketing their phones.

~~~
majewsky
It's basically the same as brand vs. no-name products, albeit with larger
absolute values. I can buy an Android smartphone that's largely equivalent to
an iPhone for half the price, and I can buy most processed food from no-name
brands at half the price (or less) than brands. To add insult to injury, at
least here in Germany, no-name products are usually produced by the same
companies making the brand product, so it's not even a quality compromise
(usually they only add some extra flavor to the brand product).

~~~
yodsanklai
An other example is bottled water that can cost about 1000 times more than tap
water.

~~~
majewsky
Especially ironic since tap water is the most strictly regulated beverage in
Germany.

------
dougmwne
Look past the airpod hate train in this post and I think you'll see a valid
point. Post-Jobs Apple is shifting towards being a technology fashion company.
It was always in their DNA, but if you look at the Apple Watch as well, the
trend is clear. Since fashion is practically the platonic ideal of a marketing
induced want, Apple fashion products will be useful examples of marketing's
power to change our behavior.

~~~
k-mcgrady
Just by entering the Watch market you're doing fashion though. As more tech
becomes 'wearable' won't all tech companies become fashion companies in some
sense? Technically you could argue Google Glass was a fashion product (just
not a very fashionable one).

~~~
Balgair
Damn good point! I never really realized that before, but you are totally
right. Watches and glasses are (maybe due to Luxotica) in the fashion
category, you can't hide them in a pocket like you can with a phone. You want
to show them off. Other items include bracelets, earrings, teeth/braces,
anklets/armlets, and rings. Many of these are female specific though, at least
in the US. I would not be surprised to find that these fit-bit things are
aimed towards being a 'smart' replacement for bracelets, as a way to 'signal'
that you are wealthy. The new earbuds for Apple may be a foray into replacing
earrings with 'smart' earrings. The next things to look out for are then
'smart' versions of rings, anklets, and (somehow) braces, though I imagine
only the braces for Asian countries where braces are seen as a luxury good and
not a medical one. Other far-future things would then be hand-bags, clutches,
wallets or belts, shoes, and dresses, possibly even 'smart' make-up like
lipsticks and mascara holders. Basically, Apple is maybe deciding to become a
techy fashion and signaling mechanism for wealthy and upper middle class
people. The price is very high, but the quality is also very good too, though
maybe not enough for the price. If this is true, expect more things that are
'exclusive' and tied towards appearance.

------
mestrejr
The author talks about Bluetooth headphones as if it was an invention of the
evil Apple... I've been exclusively using Bluetooth headphones/earphones, with
my phones, since 2009, when the NOKIA BH-905 came out. And its price was
around $300.

The liberty of movement a Bluetooth pair gives you, either running, around the
house, or in your commute, made me never go back... I'm already on my 7th
different Bluetooth headphone/earphone.

You can critique the design that Apple chose for its Bluetooth hearbuds, but
don't say Bluetooth headphones/earphones in general are unjustifiable
consumerism and that wired is the way to go...

~~~
extra88
You've bought 7 sets of Bluetooth headphones in 7 years, for ~$300 each. I get
that there are advantages to not having that wire but spending hundreds a year
would be enough to keep me away. Plus the nuisance of having to charge them
and the lower audio fidelity (though I'm far from an audiophile so my bar is
set low, reliability and call quality more important).

~~~
majewsky
Later models most likely cost less because the technology became more
commoditized.

~~~
extra88
That's true, though I wouldn't expect such a fan to opt for the cheapest
available. If someone's buying an average of one a year, that could be due to
poor durability or each iteration has clear room for improvement, addressed by
another model.

[http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-wireless-exercise-
head...](http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-wireless-exercise-headphones/)

My understanding are the AirPods are a relative bargain when compared to other
models that use independent pieces in each ear.

------
pipio21
As an engineer and business owner one of my main concerns is how to bring
value to my customers. But making anything new or innovative is incredible
expensive.

For me expending 159 USD in those earbuds in VERY CHEAP considering that
making one pair of those myself will cost me some tens of millions of dollars.

Try it yourself to put accelerometers and gyroscopes, microphones a battery, a
digital to analog converter, infrared sensors in such a small space and then
tell me this is expensive.

There are professional people who could spend wisely on something so
lightweight like this and 160 dollars is no money. For example we have some
robots controlled by voice and the current wireless headphones we use weight
too much. Cables are dangerous in this environment.

Some people believe that the world and the Universe rules around them. If they
have not use for wireless earpods, or they don't have money for it, then
nobody in the world has use for it, it it so expensive and "Unjustifiable
consumerism".

Apple has a history of bringing things to market that "nobody will use" by the
critics and then when they sell like crazy it is marketing and people being
stupid.

If you consider people stupid, you should consider that maybe you are the
stupid one and marketting in the real sense actually means understanding the
market so well you create the thing that people needs before they know.

After someone lent me a Gopro camera, I realize I needed one. That was
marketing? Yeah, it was someone who had the same needs I have creating the
product I needed before I knew.

~~~
davidivadavid
Yes, I personally find the (recurrent) dismissals of "marketing" posted on
Hacker News are getting a little bit long in the tooth.

It's either criticized as some magical tool that can flip a switch in people's
mind and make them buy anything, or something completely useless because
people should be able to educate themselves about the objective qualities of
products before they make a decision.

Every discussion gets muddled between people who a) have no experience in the
field b) mix up marketing with advertising, with sales, or with anything they
feel like criticizing c) do not seem to like the idea of commerce itself.

~~~
TeMPOraL
There's marketing, and then there's marketing. You can do this by asking
yourself what's the best product that would solve some problem for largest
amount of people and then building that, or you can ask yourself how you can
trick people into buying the cheapest shit you can get away with. A lot of
marketing criticized on HN is of the second kind; this is also pretty much
what most startups do, by the way.

~~~
davidivadavid
"There's engineering, and then there's engineering. You can do this by
creating new products that help people solve problems, or you can manufacture
bombs that blow up and kill people." And yet nobody criticizes "engineering".
Odd, isn't it?

The trouble I've noticed is that the vast majority are completely unwilling to
consider that what they feel is "the cheapest shit you can get away with"
could also be a perfectly fine product for a set of users.

The product that will solve a problem for the largest number of people will
tend to be cheap. That means most of the time it won't meet the requirement of
first-world privileged engineers who think everything has to meet impossibly
high standards of quality. But that doesn't mean it's something that's not
worthy of anybody's consideration.

So I guess the problem is with the "tricking people" rather than the quality
of the product. But here's some sobering reality for you: no amount of
"tricking" whatsoever will make people buy things they don't want. You need a
good product, i.e. a product people want.

Sure, some companies will use false advertising (illegal) or use other
(illegal) means of coercing people into buying things.

And... that's not "marketing", sorry.

Much like I won't call "terrorism" "engineering" because some people used
engineering knowledge to blow up a car somewhere.

~~~
aninhumer
> "the cheapest shit you can get away with" could also be a perfectly fine
> product for a set of users.

Where cheapness is bad is when it is sacrificing a large amount of utility for
a marginal price reduction, to trick people into thinking it's the best value.

> no amount of "tricking" whatsoever will make people buy things they don't
> want.

Well of course not, since the "trick" is making them want it when it will
provide little benefit.

~~~
davidivadavid
How do you know the benefit it provides isn't exactly commensurate to people's
willingness to pay for it?

Do you think that people buying Pet Rocks have been "tricked" into something,
for example?

------
jamra
IPhone7 comes with wired headphones that connect through the charger's port.

------
galfarragem
I live very frugal and I'm happier like that. However, I'm mature enough to
understand that the world needs some consumerism to keep an healthy job
market. The easier it is to get a job, the easier it is to correct your
mistakes/misfortune during life.

------
Spooky23
If they hate consumerism so much, why are they using Apple products and
product pictures as a click bait hook?

I buy these products because they are the tools I use to earn my living. The
EarPods are just another accessory that may or may not make sense to you.

------
mark_l_watson
My Note 4 was part of a batch of phones with no earphone jack. I buy pretty
nice Bluetooth headphones for $15. They would work fine on the new iPhones,
right? $159 earphones seems like a sucker purchase.

------
gjvc
see also
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good)

""" In an economy, the consumption of Veblen goods is a function of the Veblen
effect (goods desired for being over-priced) that is named after the American
economist Thorstein Veblen, who first identified conspicuous consumption as a
mode of status-seeking in The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899). """

------
gonvaled
Consumerism is great. You just have to try to be on the selling side, not the
buying side. Even if it is as an employee of a company selling useless stuff
to easily suggested consumers.

As it is, there is a limitless supply of consumers. Society does not need you
to play too.

------
k-mcgrady
Seriously? More shit on the iPhone headphone jack?

>> What brings this to mind is the introduction of the Apple iPhone 7. One of
its highly touted 'features' is the elimination of a headphone jack. Taking
advantage of this 'feature' requires the purchase of optional wireless earbuds
(AirPods) that retail for an additional $159.00. Plus, the AirPods need their
batteries charged independent of your smartphone on a dedicated charger (each
charge lasts a maximum of five hours) .

1\. The elimination of the headphone jack is not touted as a 'feature'. The
bluetooth alternative using the W1 chip is and that's not actually related to
the phone.

2\. AirPod's are an optional accessory. Just like a case. Or any other pair of
wireless headphones. Standard headphones still ship in the box as always and
connect to your phone with a wire. Complaining that they are 'required' to use
a feature of the phone (which again, they are not) is like complaining you
need to buy a Car to use the 'CarPlay' feature or that you need to buy a
lightbulb to use the 'HomeKit' feature.

3\. Of course they need charging. Just like most other wireless headphones. In
fact charging AirPods is more convenient than most because the carrying case
doubles as a charger and stores 24hours power. So when they're in your pocket
not being used they can be charging.

When is this circle jerk going to stop? If you're going to waste time keeping
it going at least get the basic facts right.

~~~
Apocryphon
It seems less of a critique of the headphone jack, than of $160 AirPods that
easily fall out of one's ears. As the article concludes, the saving grace is
the lack of a jack will lead to the proliferation of cheaper alternatives from
other manufacturers.

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> "AirPods that easily fall out of one's ears"

Fine, but they haven't even been released yet. EarPods are the best fitting
earphones for me. However I'm sure for others they fall out all the time. My
point is that a paragraph based on the assertion that these 'expensive'
earphones will fall out is ridiculous when the author hasn't tried them and
their fit will differ from person to person.

~~~
dougmwne
I think the author's point stands since they show that the airpods should be
expected to have the same fit as the earpods and that the earpods don't fit
half of people's ears without falling out. Therefore the $160 headphones are
vastly more disposable than wired IEMs of the same price. That's about what I
paid for a pair of etymotic er4s a decade ago.

