• ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    right, but “looks nice” only becomes a consideration when you’re trying to sell a brand, rather then provide a good product. If they were trying to sell a good product, they would definitely put a pump at the bottom so that you can get all of the product out with ease to use the example from th thread, but they don’t not because of how it looks (even if it was a barrier, they would just engineer it to look more “appealing” like they do everything else), but because they want it to be hard to get all of the product out, so that you buy a new one without having used it all. Because profit.

    • suction@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ding, ding and another ding. I am shocked that people give corps still the benefit of doubt, and assume it’s because of “nicer looks”.

      • mister_flibble@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The point I was trying to make was “because profit”. I was just trying to say it was plausible that some asshat in marketing said that design would sell better for appearance reasons as well. That’s not benefit of the doubt, that’s just a different way of being profit over product.

        Edit - top opening bottles tend to be taller and thinner than bottom opening for balance reasons. A certain subset of consumers are gonna assume taller bottle means more product and buy it. So there you go-a possible profit driven aesthetic reason. There was literally a post here the other day with Coke cans doing essentially the same fucking thing.