3 ms·

I think there is a big difference in that there are only 2 mobile OSes and users stick with the same one for years. Imagine there were only 2 restaurants and 9

I think there is a big difference in that there are only 2 mobile OSes and users stick with the same one for years. Imagine there were only 2 restaurants and 99% of people went exclusively to the same one every day for years.

bko 5y ago
Mobile OSes are not restaurants. Believe it or not, but people are pretty happy with their mobile OSes. We've seen phone usage increase and stay very high. And people dish out up to $2k for new devices. People continue to spend a lot on phones and replace them often. You can not like certain practices of Google or Apple or aspects of their privacy policy, but don't gaslight yourself by saying that somehow the average device consumer is terribly concerned or hurt in any meaningful direct way. Most people like their phones and when you get a well funded competitor like Blackberry or Amazon or even Google hardware, people shrug and go back to Samsung/Apple
- singron 5y ago
  I don't think a disagree. I think this is exactly what makes this so tricky. On the consumer side, users have a choice, pick their favorite, occasionally switch when they buy a new phone, and are generally content. However on the supply side, there are 2 disjoint monopolies. You reach iOS users through Apple's monopoly on iOS distribution, and you reach Android users through Google's [near-]monopoly on Android distribution. To continue the hurt analogy, it's the difference between there being 2 restaurant chains in every town and there being 1 restaurant chain for the Eastern US and a different chain for the Western US (and moving across the country cost $400-$800).
- TheCoelacanth 5y ago
  The question isn't whether people like their mobile OSs. It's whether there is meaningful competition in the mobile OS space. The only two mobile OS providers of any significance colluding together is not a good indicator of meaningful competition.
Dracophoenix 5y ago
That was practically the case in the early- to mid- 2000s with McDonalds and Burger King.
mcphage 5y ago
After the franchise wars, now all restaurants are Taco Bell.

bko 5y ago

Mobile OSes are not restaurants. Believe it or not, but people are pretty happy with their mobile OSes. We've seen phone usage increase and stay very high. And people dish out up to $2k for new devices. People continue to spend a lot on phones and replace them often. You can not like certain practices of Google or Apple or aspects of their privacy policy, but don't gaslight yourself by saying that somehow the average device consumer is terribly concerned or hurt in any meaningful direct way. Most people like their phones and when you get a well funded competitor like Blackberry or Amazon or even Google hardware, people shrug and go back to Samsung/Apple

singron 5y ago
I don't think a disagree. I think this is exactly what makes this so tricky. On the consumer side, users have a choice, pick their favorite, occasionally switch when they buy a new phone, and are generally content. However on the supply side, there are 2 disjoint monopolies. You reach iOS users through Apple's monopoly on iOS distribution, and you reach Android users through Google's [near-]monopoly on Android distribution. To continue the hurt analogy, it's the difference between there being 2 restaurant chains in every town and there being 1 restaurant chain for the Eastern US and a different chain for the Western US (and moving across the country cost $400-$800).
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
The question isn't whether people like their mobile OSs. It's whether there is meaningful competition in the mobile OS space. The only two mobile OS providers of any significance colluding together is not a good indicator of meaningful competition.

Dracophoenix 5y ago

That was practically the case in the early- to mid- 2000s with McDonalds and Burger King.

mcphage 5y ago

After the franchise wars, now all restaurants are Taco Bell.