Originally Posted by tiger02
Actually what I mean is that I don't need all those "high profit gadgets."
That's fine for you, individually, but you do realize that phone manufacturers are still going where the most money is to be made. A phone that does nothing but make and receive calls is not a very high profit model.
It's analogous to the Auto industry. The US has more laws and regulations covering things such as emissions and safety equipment, so JP and EU have to dumb down their cars to work with our highly restrictive rules. With some specialized models (the most advanced models, usually) auto manufacturers don't even bother; they figure its not worth it. Same with phones. Before a phone can be imported to the US, it has to be retrofitted to work on lower quality networks, and with the top end models, there is no point, since it won't be as capable without the network to back it up. Just like a sports car won't be as worthwhile with restrictive emissions devices and lower quality gas and extra weight from safety equipment.
I need a phone. If I want a high profit gadget, I'll buy one. But if I want to talk to people for less than $0.18 (Hungary) or $0.34
(Italy) per minute, I have to move to the US. So no, I'm saying that capitalism has bred a better product for consumers, and the current version of soft Euro socialism has bred a better product for manufacturers.
Capitalism has bread a much more mediocre product geared towards the masses? Yes, I can see that. Capitalism has bread the most socialized cell phone. Hehe. Ok. Socailism, though, has allowed the most freedom to allow manufacturers to build the most advanced device.
Also, hows this for capitalism. FCC overregulation, yet again.
So now we have to suffer longer with old technology before we can fully embrace new technology.
My point here is merely to say the grass isn't always greener. You may have higher prices, but you also have more choices.