5 ms·

Exactly. Can you imagine how much it would be if Apple had a monopoly on smartphones?

scarface74 8y ago
Apple would never have a monopoly on smart phones even if Google had not come along. Most people either can't or won't spend the amount that Apple charges for phones. The cheapest iPhone is $100 more expensive than the average price of the Android. If anything, Microsoft would have won over OEMs and been where Android is.
- kamikaz1k 8y ago
  True, but now I have to wonder how much MSFT would be charging Google for the privilege? Or maybe a different company, like if Amazon didn't fail with Fire Phone. Perhaps that entity could have been more forgiving since they're not as aggressive with the same set of productivity services. But in general Google has lost that moat for the rest of the mobile era. At best they can hope for is a partnership. Actually, imagine now homegrown Alternate-Android competitor that was based in China. Google would be cut from that too.
- chocolatebunny 8y ago
  I think BlackBerry might have won if Android wasn't around.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    The other OEMs weren't going to just stand still and RIM never licensed their OS. Someone would have offered a platform for the other OEMs or maybe J2ME would have evolved. But Ms was the only company that had any experience with building a platform or the developer relations.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  Apple could create its own 2nd tier.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    In the 40 years that Apple has been in business, it's never gone after the low end market. The Apple // series was always more expensive than its contemporaries, as was the Mac and now the iPhone. There was a brief time that Apple had the lowest cost media players but that was because they cornered the market on the hard drives that they were using and then the flash market. But why would they? They already capture 80%+ of the profit in the global cell phone market.
    - dredmorbius 8y ago
      Apple's never owned an entire segment, as it did smartphones. And, actually, it does have a tiered presence: iPad, iPhone, iPod, Shuffle. I'm not sure how many of those remain extant. The goal would be staving off encroachment from below.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        But the "tier" is just lower priced compared to other Apple products, not lower priced compared to competitors. The average selling price of an Android phone is $202 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/309472/global-average-selling-price-smartphones/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/309472/global-average-se...). That's still $150 less than the cheapest iPhone. The average selling price of a tablet is still much less than the lowest cost iPad. Apple doesn't sell iPods anymore except the iPod in name only iPod Touch. Apple only has about 12% world wide market share in smart phones.
        dredmorbius 8y ago
        I understand that. My point being that, at least for "mobile distraction device", Apple does in fact have a tiered, price-discriminating (in the economic sense) set of products. There's also the used-device market, as noted by another reader. I'd considered making that point as well, though uncharacteristically for me I decided to focus on a single thread.
  - curun1r 8y ago

Apple would never have a monopoly on smart phones even if Google had not come along. Most people either can't or won't spend the amount that Apple charges for phones. The cheapest iPhone is $100 more expensive than the average price of the Android. If anything, Microsoft would have won over OEMs and been where Android is.

kamikaz1k 8y ago
True, but now I have to wonder how much MSFT would be charging Google for the privilege? Or maybe a different company, like if Amazon didn't fail with Fire Phone. Perhaps that entity could have been more forgiving since they're not as aggressive with the same set of productivity services. But in general Google has lost that moat for the rest of the mobile era. At best they can hope for is a partnership. Actually, imagine now homegrown Alternate-Android competitor that was based in China. Google would be cut from that too.
chocolatebunny 8y ago
I think BlackBerry might have won if Android wasn't around.
- scarface74 8y ago
  The other OEMs weren't going to just stand still and RIM never licensed their OS. Someone would have offered a platform for the other OEMs or maybe J2ME would have evolved. But Ms was the only company that had any experience with building a platform or the developer relations.
dredmorbius 8y ago
Apple could create its own 2nd tier.
- scarface74 8y ago
  In the 40 years that Apple has been in business, it's never gone after the low end market. The Apple // series was always more expensive than its contemporaries, as was the Mac and now the iPhone. There was a brief time that Apple had the lowest cost media players but that was because they cornered the market on the hard drives that they were using and then the flash market. But why would they? They already capture 80%+ of the profit in the global cell phone market.
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    Apple's never owned an entire segment, as it did smartphones. And, actually, it does have a tiered presence: iPad, iPhone, iPod, Shuffle. I'm not sure how many of those remain extant. The goal would be staving off encroachment from below.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      But the "tier" is just lower priced compared to other Apple products, not lower priced compared to competitors. The average selling price of an Android phone is $202 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/309472/global-average-selling-price-smartphones/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/309472/global-average-se...). That's still $150 less than the cheapest iPhone. The average selling price of a tablet is still much less than the lowest cost iPad. Apple doesn't sell iPods anymore except the iPod in name only iPod Touch. Apple only has about 12% world wide market share in smart phones.
      - dredmorbius 8y ago
        I understand that. My point being that, at least for "mobile distraction device", Apple does in fact have a tiered, price-discriminating (in the economic sense) set of products. There's also the used-device market, as noted by another reader. I'd considered making that point as well, though uncharacteristically for me I decided to focus on a single thread.
- curun1r 8y ago