4 ms·

Difference is mobile platforms, as their name implies, are not geographically locked. There aren't android or apple only counties, there are however Comcast or

Difference is mobile platforms, as their name implies, are not geographically locked. There aren't android or apple only counties, there are however Comcast or Spectrum only counties. This means the cost of switching is too high to really be considered in competition.

rayiner 8y ago
More than half of households have two or more broadband providers at 25 mbps+; with 5G, the typical household is going to have 2-4 such providers. Two providers isn't a highly competitive market, but it's the same level of competition as exists for mobile platforms, and that seems to work fine.
- djrogers 8y ago
  Sorry, you're looking at that wrong - almost half of US households only have a single choice for ISP. That's not competition, it's a travesty.
  - rayiner 8y ago
    Only if you exclude wireless options, which is becoming an ever-less rational thing to do. (15% of households making over $100k/year have ditched wired broadband in favor of wireless, and that number is growing rapidly.) Also, the question is which households have options? I strongly suspect its the households in wealthier metro areas and suburbs. Competition for households that are the largest sources of potential revenue is going to drive the market. It's exactly like mobile devices--a huge fraction of the market has just one choice of smart phone platform (Android), because Apple doesn't sell cheap phones. But competition between Android and iOS in the mid-range and high-end drive the behavior of the market.
    - amazon_not 8y ago
      > Only if you exclude wireless options, which is becoming an ever-less rational thing to do. Maybe some day wireless will become a meaningful substitute for wireline broadband, but that day is not here yet. Thus it's very much the rational thing to do to exclude it.
- mikeash 8y ago
  The current mobile landscape is far from fine. It could be a lot worse, but it’s not great.

rayiner 8y ago

More than half of households have two or more broadband providers at 25 mbps+; with 5G, the typical household is going to have 2-4 such providers. Two providers isn't a highly competitive market, but it's the same level of competition as exists for mobile platforms, and that seems to work fine.

djrogers 8y ago
Sorry, you're looking at that wrong - almost half of US households only have a single choice for ISP. That's not competition, it's a travesty.
- rayiner 8y ago
  Only if you exclude wireless options, which is becoming an ever-less rational thing to do. (15% of households making over $100k/year have ditched wired broadband in favor of wireless, and that number is growing rapidly.) Also, the question is which households have options? I strongly suspect its the households in wealthier metro areas and suburbs. Competition for households that are the largest sources of potential revenue is going to drive the market. It's exactly like mobile devices--a huge fraction of the market has just one choice of smart phone platform (Android), because Apple doesn't sell cheap phones. But competition between Android and iOS in the mid-range and high-end drive the behavior of the market.
  - amazon_not 8y ago
    > Only if you exclude wireless options, which is becoming an ever-less rational thing to do. Maybe some day wireless will become a meaningful substitute for wireline broadband, but that day is not here yet. Thus it's very much the rational thing to do to exclude it.
mikeash 8y ago
The current mobile landscape is far from fine. It could be a lot worse, but it’s not great.