Yep, I personally have decided that I prefer dynamo lights, so yes I now have that bias. Doesn't change what I said though. In order for the market to demand something, they need to be aware it exists. I think it fairly likely that the vast majority of cyclists in the U.S. either don't know dynamo lighting exists or they think of it as the old bottle dynamos with incandescent lights.

You are correct that a noob (or even many experienced cyclists) would choose a $200 battery light over a $200 dynamo system. The battery light represents a mid to high level product, while the dynamo light at that price range would be the cheapest available. However, if someone (noob or experienced) is considering lights in that range, it doesn't take much more than $200 to get very comparable quality dyno lighting system. Individual issues, dictate which would be preferable, as neither system is always better.

Yes, most consumers let subjective preferences matter more than objective ones. That is why people buy things all the time. The problem is subjective by nature is individual, which is why subjective reviews are nearly useless.

BTW, preference for beamshape is only partially subjective. It has an objective component. IE, it maximizes the light output in the areas where light is actually needed when riding on the road, while minimizing the resistance associated with powering the light... If battery lights made use of such improved technology they could either significantly improve their battery life or significantly increase the actual light levels on the road in front of the bike...

Yep, you already provided a link to that retailler?, and I already thanked you for that.