The transition from a bicycle to a car is not analogous to the transition between D&D and Pathfinder in the same way that the transition between Coke and Dr. Pepper is. The analogy linking the latter two works because these are changes rooted primarily in preference as opposed to practicality. You can't change the relationship that holds the analogy together like that.
My point is that your analogy does
not in fact work, and, further, is unnecessary - just say D&D and Pathfinder, comparing them to sodas, football teams, boardgames, automobiles, etc. is an unnecessary and obfuscating encumbrance. Possibly intended to conceal rather than enlighten.
That's why they are used to assist in understanding, rather than to prove a point. A couple of you are acting like you can mess with the analogy in order to discredit the underlying argument, and that's not so.
A good analogy may aid in consideration, however these were not such gnostic comparisons. The exact same conversation could have been had just saying D&D and Pathfinder with no loss of understanding.
And that's fine. But it's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about consumers who make a gradual switch to a different product because of a (typically) taste-based preference for that product, and why it's better to be the guy at the entry point than the guy who gets the entry point guy's leftovers.
And many would, to use your own analogy, compare 4e to Coke II, and have. A comparison that I feel helps your analogy at the cost of your point.
WotC did and Coke both did studies that convinced them that they were correct in making changes to a formula that was working, and both ended up helping their competition at the cost of their own success.
On the shiny, happy side, I would not compare 4e to Vista - Microsoft's own studies showed discontent early on, but they pressed on regardless. WotC did listen to their groups, but....
One thing that helps WotC in this instance is that the numbers do
not need to add up to 100%, but are probably closer to 120% - a fair number of folks, nonpartisans if you will, own
both. A greater number own 3.X and PFRPG, 3.X and 4e, or all three.
As for name recognition... I have heard folks calling Pathfinder D&D, and have heard a clerk, when asked what Pathfinder was, reply 'it's pretty much D&D.' He then went on to say that it was closer to the D&D he had played than 4e was.
He was apparently convincing, the customer left with the Core, the APG, and the Bestiary.
The problem with becoming synonymous with something is that the term can become generic. Zipper being a case in point. I have heard gaming conventions called D&D conventions, as an example. Most zip fasteners are not made by Zipper, but most folks still call them zippers.
The Auld Grump