Early horseless carriages didn't sell well, if at all. Consumers weren't making the decision to replace the horse and carriage. Continuous innovation and industry and government did that.
Not until the choice is taken away do consumers (appear to) make a change.
We could all be driving electric cars right now if consumers were making real choices. But we won't see a great number of electrics selling until they become so good that the gasoline car is practically taken off of the table as a viable choice. You can then credit the change to the consumers, but it's really much greater forces at work behind the scenes making it happen.
If consumers wanted to continue using the horse-and-buggy, they would have continued to buy it. But they didn't. The desired the automobile.
I'm not sure how the notion that "consumers don't decide anything" can really hold water. Consumers are literally the people who allocate their resources to particular goods.
In some cases, external forces remove or enforce particular choices. But I don't know how this implies that consumers can't decide anything.
Exactly. Henry Ford paid his workers very well, not out of altruism because he was the one of the most unaltruistic people you can think of, but because he wanted them to be able to afford his car. They would become mobile advertisements of his new technology.
In that, they were much like the Google Glassers are today.
Who decided that automobiles should have seat belts, collapsable steering columns, and the numerous other safety features that save lives today? Hint: not consumers.
Consumers.