Your example is not all that great dude. Here is a better example:
The 2006 Mitsubishi Lancer.
It basically has 4 models: ES, OZ Rally, RalliArt, Evolution (yes, the Evos are technically Lancers).
Now, the ES is basically the base model. The OZ Rally is a rally edition with OZ Rally wheels. The RalliArt is another rally edition. The Evolution is their high end edition.
A sedan and a pickup are not similar at all (well, slightly)> I see what you are going for, trying to say they are very different from each other. Well, this is like the 2006 Lancer, where there are incredibly significant differences, but looking at an ES, RalliArt or OZ Rally from the outside, it is very difficult to tell. If I get Altezza tail lights, a RalliArt spoiler and OZ Rally wheels, it will appear to be a messed up hybrid and confuse it even further.
What makes the vehicle example much different than the iOS example is just that, iOS. If I get an iPad 2, and I am just a normal user, not a geek, besides the outer looks (slimmer, liighter) how will I personally be able to tell the different between an iPad 1 and iPad 2? The other thing is that they are all running the same OS. This is the same OS that is also run in the iPod Touch and the iPhones. Sure, you can use the Linux argument, but look at how many different distros are out there. Google is only doing what they see as being successful from what Apple does.
To sit there and deny that the GUI is not the same is silly. Now if you got inside of that same pickup or sedan and the interior appeared to be identical, then yes, argument works. Unless you actually have a real use for an iPad 2 outside of it being slimmer and lighter, you have no purpose getting one. There are, what, 15 million iPads floating around, so those will not be obsolete or thrown to the curb when Jobs & Co. can still get money from them. That means that apps will still be released on it and it will still be useful.
I just have a feeling that Jobs is trying to treat the Apple products like the phone market. See, many people, like myself, have year contracts with phone companies, so once that is up, they can renew the contract and get a discount on a new phone, so why not get a phone with better phone functionalities (like an iPhone 4 or whatever). People have a reason to get a new phone/upgrade a new phone, and many times, it is a "contract is up, get the updated version" and not a "here is a new tablet a year after one we just released and the new one will run everything the old one did and the old one will not be obsolete, but buy it anyway".
See, with computers and computer parts, one part that was brand new a year ago that was selling for $300 I can get today for $100. iPad: same price as it was 1 year ago. You can sell newer computer products if you phase out the old ones, and judging the Apple mindset, that will not happen anytime soon.
In my eyes, this is Apple just getting cocky doing something like this. They will release a newer version of the same exact product that is not a phone, which means you pay full price, a year after their older version, keep the old version the same price without dropping it, and then get rumors started for the iPad 3 (and the iPad 2 is not even out yet). They are trying the cell phone model of business with tablets/pc's.
People are paying full price for this stuff. See, I do not know a single iPhone user that paid full price for their phone (and I know lots of iPhone users). That is a big separating factor between the iPad and the iPhone lines. Not even the Macbooks try something so bold.
When people call these the iPad XL, it is very close to the truth since they both run the iOS and have close to the same functionality (except the part where one natively makes phone calls). Going back to my car example, that would be like calling the ES the Lancer light, calling the OZ Rally and RalliArt the standard models, and calling the Evo the XL. Yeah, that is really not far from the truth.
Sorry, but Jobs and Co. are just trying to get money from people at this point and not trying to deliver quality products (as proven with the fact that if they were about givintg quality products, it would not still cost me $200 or $300 retail for a normal iPhone, not 3G or 3Gs or 4, and the iPad would also drop in price). If they were about delivering high end products and not about money, they would stop caring as much about their older products and drop the prices on them. Instead, they keep them the same price to get money from us.