> Apple doesn't have ~300 Euro phones with OLED screens in its offer.
Sure they do, the iPhone 12 is still widely available and it’s at least twice as fast as an A54.
The prestige argument just hold up when you look at the data unless you scope it to say flagships. Google and Samsung charge just as much, and they have the same decreasingly small prestige that conveys. We’re 15 years into the touchscreen era so you’re just not impressing anyone.
Now, maybe that extra hundred euros is really critical to you but on the other hand the iPhone will have a service life years longer (it’s over twice as fast), but also neither of these is in a price range where you’re moving into prestige territory. This is like arguing Toyota vs. VW in an alternate universe where Mercedes and Bentley don’t exist. Phones are an impressively flat market in that regard: Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai have the same phones as millions of people who earn many orders of magnitude less than either of them.
I assumed you meant yearly because the idea that someone would be able to afford a €400 phone but not a €500 phone just doesn’t make sense when you’re talking about monthly income. Someone making €2k monthly is looking at less 1% of their annual income difference for a device they’ll buy once or twice per decade. It’s a noticeable amount of money, sure, but I’d be quite surprised if that was the area they’d feel a priority to economize.
Sure they do, the iPhone 12 is still widely available and it’s at least twice as fast as an A54.
The prestige argument just hold up when you look at the data unless you scope it to say flagships. Google and Samsung charge just as much, and they have the same decreasingly small prestige that conveys. We’re 15 years into the touchscreen era so you’re just not impressing anyone.