3 ms·

If Google chose that path, other manufacturers would still need an OS to put on their phones - and it's likely Windows Phone would be the contender. So maybe we

If Google chose that path, other manufacturers would still need an OS to put on their phones - and it's likely Windows Phone would be the contender. So maybe we'd live in a world with 3 mobile OS's and more competition. The point is, the alternative scenario involves more actors making different choices.

slaw 4y ago
We would live in a world with 2 mobile OS's iOS and Windows Phone. Android would land in Google Graveyard.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  Then maybe Firefox OS and Ubuntu Touch would still be around as FOSS mobile OS.
  - doublepg23 4y ago
    Firefox OS was built from a lot of Android internals.
  - riffraff 4y ago
    WebOS!
  - linmob 4y ago
    Ubuntu Touch is still around, see [0]. That said, with continued funding by Canonical, they like would have progressed differently (likely more). Firefox OS and webOS are still around under different names, which are Capyloon [1] and LuneOS respectively [2]. [0]: https://ubuntu-touch.io/ https://ubuntu-touch.io/ [1]: https://capyloon.org/ https://capyloon.org/ [2]: https://webos-ports.org/wiki/Main_Page https://webos-ports.org/wiki/Main_Page
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      Interesting, I had thought KaiOS was the last remnant of FFOS. I wonder which of these projects is most active at this time.
- kernal 4y ago
  Windows Phone was always destined to fall. There is no scenario in which Windows Phone would not been beaten into irrelevance by Google and by Microsoft's own actions in undermining their underwhelming and unpopular mobile OS.
  - oblio 4y ago
    Well, this thread is in the parallel universe in which Google would have sold only its own Android devices. So no Android + LG, Sony, Samsung, Huawei, etc. If you look at Google's hardware's capabilities, Android would have flopped immediately. As bad as the org level issues were with Windows Phone, it would have still beaten Android-on-Google-hardware-only.
    - kernal 4y ago
      Microsoft actually charged a license fee for Windows Phone OS which is just one of many reasons OEM's abandoned the OS. Google also would have undercut their licensing fees to ensure their failure. Additionally, the absence of any Google apps would have also ensured a quick death for Windows Phone. Its failure was inevitable and justified for what they did to their customers and OEM's.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        In this hypothetical Android apps are far less relevant with that ecosystem only being present on Google phones. I wonder without AOSP or some other major FOSS mobile operating system to shake things up, if smartphones would be more like the PDA industry in the 1990s, with proprietary OS's from OEMs competing with each other. Maybe Palm sticks around and webOS gets a long lease on life. Maybe Samsung, Intel, the Linux Foundation, and co. try to get mass adoption of Tizen, with hilarious results. Though perhaps if Nokia sticks around, MeeGo as based on the Harmattan design in the N9 gets wider use, delaying the need for a successor like Tizen. In any case, with only Apple and Microsoft as their mobile competitors and without Android devices cutting at their margins, BlackBerry still has a fighting chance.
  - babypuncher 4y ago
Apocryphon 4y ago
Maybe Nokia would have stuck around unmerged and there would have been hope for the very polished MeeGo build seen on the Nokia N9. Not to mention BlackBerry and webOS still being contenders.
babypuncher 4y ago
I think Google would have killed off Android before it could really take off if they went that route. Early Android was very rough compared to iPhoneOS, and one of its biggest selling points was the variety of hardware you could get it on. Early successful devices like the Motorola Droid and HTC Evo 4G were important to solidifying Android as a serious smartphone platform. This strategy allowed Google to focus on improving the software while experienced hardware manufacturers did what they already do best.
rootw0rm 4y ago
I'm still bitter about Windows Phone. Nokia's hardware was great, Windows Phone was great, but only Microsoft Partners had permission to access the low level APIs that mattered...effectively neutering app development.

slaw 4y ago

We would live in a world with 2 mobile OS's iOS and Windows Phone. Android would land in Google Graveyard.

Apocryphon 4y ago
Then maybe Firefox OS and Ubuntu Touch would still be around as FOSS mobile OS.
- doublepg23 4y ago
  Firefox OS was built from a lot of Android internals.
- riffraff 4y ago
  WebOS!
- linmob 4y ago
  Ubuntu Touch is still around, see [0]. That said, with continued funding by Canonical, they like would have progressed differently (likely more). Firefox OS and webOS are still around under different names, which are Capyloon [1] and LuneOS respectively [2]. [0]: https://ubuntu-touch.io/ https://ubuntu-touch.io/ [1]: https://capyloon.org/ https://capyloon.org/ [2]: https://webos-ports.org/wiki/Main_Page https://webos-ports.org/wiki/Main_Page
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    Interesting, I had thought KaiOS was the last remnant of FFOS. I wonder which of these projects is most active at this time.
kernal 4y ago
Windows Phone was always destined to fall. There is no scenario in which Windows Phone would not been beaten into irrelevance by Google and by Microsoft's own actions in undermining their underwhelming and unpopular mobile OS.
- oblio 4y ago
  Well, this thread is in the parallel universe in which Google would have sold only its own Android devices. So no Android + LG, Sony, Samsung, Huawei, etc. If you look at Google's hardware's capabilities, Android would have flopped immediately. As bad as the org level issues were with Windows Phone, it would have still beaten Android-on-Google-hardware-only.
  - kernal 4y ago
    Microsoft actually charged a license fee for Windows Phone OS which is just one of many reasons OEM's abandoned the OS. Google also would have undercut their licensing fees to ensure their failure. Additionally, the absence of any Google apps would have also ensured a quick death for Windows Phone. Its failure was inevitable and justified for what they did to their customers and OEM's.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      In this hypothetical Android apps are far less relevant with that ecosystem only being present on Google phones. I wonder without AOSP or some other major FOSS mobile operating system to shake things up, if smartphones would be more like the PDA industry in the 1990s, with proprietary OS's from OEMs competing with each other. Maybe Palm sticks around and webOS gets a long lease on life. Maybe Samsung, Intel, the Linux Foundation, and co. try to get mass adoption of Tizen, with hilarious results. Though perhaps if Nokia sticks around, MeeGo as based on the Harmattan design in the N9 gets wider use, delaying the need for a successor like Tizen. In any case, with only Apple and Microsoft as their mobile competitors and without Android devices cutting at their margins, BlackBerry still has a fighting chance.
- babypuncher 4y ago

Apocryphon 4y ago

Maybe Nokia would have stuck around unmerged and there would have been hope for the very polished MeeGo build seen on the Nokia N9. Not to mention BlackBerry and webOS still being contenders.

babypuncher 4y ago

I think Google would have killed off Android before it could really take off if they went that route. Early Android was very rough compared to iPhoneOS, and one of its biggest selling points was the variety of hardware you could get it on. Early successful devices like the Motorola Droid and HTC Evo 4G were important to solidifying Android as a serious smartphone platform. This strategy allowed Google to focus on improving the software while experienced hardware manufacturers did what they already do best.

rootw0rm 4y ago

I'm still bitter about Windows Phone. Nokia's hardware was great, Windows Phone was great, but only Microsoft Partners had permission to access the low level APIs that mattered...effectively neutering app development.