Are iOS and Android our only options for a while?

Lucian Hodoboc

Lucian Hodoboc

n00b
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
14
Since Microsoft abandoned Windows Phone and Blackberry abandoned Blackberry OS and adopted Android OS, our only two options in terms of mobile operating systems for the past couple of years have been iOS and Android. Do you think this is likely to change in the near future? Will a third competitor emerge on the mobile operating systems scene in the upcoming years?
 
Google may have a beta of Fuchsia in mid to late 2019 so we can see what it might be like but it's a rather long ways off before we'll see it on smartphones. Aside from that Librem device running a modified version of PureOS (not Android based but actual Linux, not running on a virtual machine as Android does) there's not much else out there. Since Android and iOS are so entrenched with modern devices, I don't have any real expectations that something else will come along and suddenly displace either of them let alone even make a dent.

I still have a BlackBerry Z10 powered by BlackBerry 10 OS (based on QNX, a real-time OS) and even to this day 6 years later it's still crazy snappy and responsive. A dual core device with 2GB of RAM back in 2012-ish was crazy awesome hardware, and I still use it regularly to listen to music since it has an awesome Wolfson DAC in it that just sounds amazing. It's sad knowing that BB10 could have done so much better but nobody gave a shit to develop seriously decent apps for it, sadly. BlackBerry at one point in time was literally giving away BB10 powered devices to practically anybody that signed up to be an app developer at their dev website, I missed out on that opportunity to get a freebie but even so I will keep this Z10 till it simply doesn't function anymore.

Windows Phone, yeah, what a dismal failure that always was. Windows Mobile did OK long ago but the transition to the Metro-style flat UI really irked too many people that just didn't get the concept or what it was meant to be in terms of actually using it. I owned a lot of Windows Mobile hardware aka PocketPC style stuff long ago but I've never owned any Windows Phone devices. I did have a Zune HD for a short period of time and it was just awesome but Microsoft kept it so locked down in terms of a developer community that it ended up being like BB10: a fantastic POTENTIAL but ruined by the very company that produced the product itself.

Android and iOS rule the device OS market and will for the foreseeable future but you just never know if something else might come along and make that dent.
 
Lucian Hodoboc said:
Since Microsoft abandoned Windows Phone and Blackberry abandoned Blackberry OS and adopted Android OS, our only two options in terms of mobile operating systems for the past couple of years have been iOS and Android. Do you think this is likely to change in the near future? Will a third competitor emerge on the mobile operating systems scene in the upcoming years?
Click to expand...

I don't think it'll change for a long while. Think about how long you've had just two realistic desktop OS choices (Chrome OS is significant, but still not much of a threat outside of schools). Now imagine that we're roughly halfway through that cycle with smartphones.

I believe it was Steve Jobs who said just why things are unlikely to change. If you're going to disrupt things, you can't just be a little bit better, you have to be a lot better -- that is, people can't imagine why they used the old technology. That's why BlackBerry, Microsoft, Palm and the others never really stood a chance. It was always only a little bit better, and sometimes well behind. If anyone is going to disrupt Apple or Google, they'll need an interface, apps and hardware so powerful that it'll feel like January 2007 all over again.

I'd almost expect the next breakthrough to come from a fundamentally new or underexplored technology, like augmented reality.
 
Aurelius said:
(Chrome OS is significant, but still not much of a threat outside of schools)
Click to expand...

For people like us, I agree, but take it from someone who talks to the public about their computer habits every day: MOST people out there don't need windows, and would do even better with ChromeOS. In fact, it would cut down on the botnet and virus attacks too.
 
Lucian Hodoboc said:
It sounds interesting. I hope it doesn't end up a failed product like Sailfish OS and the devices created by Jolla. :confused:
Click to expand...

Sorry to say, but there's a good chance it'll fail. Like Purism's laptops, it strikes me as the classic overly optimistic FOSS project: they think it'll conquer the world, but it'll only really be appealing to a handful of open source absolutists.
 
It's very unlikely we'll get a third entrant at this point. It would basically have to be a tech company that's already established in another space and then just has a billion to burn over the next 5 years eating dirt trying to get any level of market share and any level of return. They'll have to not only have R&D dollars, but be able to push distribution preferably both directly, but really through cell service providers and big box chains. Even after doing all that, it's unlikely that they'd ever get more than 5% market share. So they'd have to have some pretty big reasons for doing all that work for likely very little return. Unless, like Aurelius pointed out, it's quantum leaps better than any other product on the market and it's priced at a level that everyone is capable of buying it.

Right now there are only a few companies with that sort of cash. Some are more likely than others. Amazon actually could do this if they wanted. However they have shown a lack of pursued interest in hardware. They create things casually at best. Far from annual updates, creating massive launches, etc. They dipped their toe in with the Fire Phone. But really it was just a specialized version of Android. If they want to make a dent in the cellphone market, let alone the cellphone OS market, they're going to have to be significantly more aggressive and show a greater willingness to burn money as well as create a device and operating system that is incredibly refined. As well as, you know rolling out software updates in a remotely timely manner.

Samsung I'm sure was thinking about it. It's obvious they wanted to siphon money from Android in the past when they created their own App store before Google effectively shut that down. They're going to have to spend a lot more time on software though. TouchWiz is very well known for being garbage and Samsung of course would have to figure out how to create a development platform from the ground up. They haven't shown that they can even do the basics. Development of an entire OS that is supported seems out of reach for them unless they really change into a much more software oriented company.

Microsoft could also take a third stab at it. I honestly feel like Windows 8/10 mobile could have been successful if they would have actually kept putting in support with expedient updates. If they would have locked onto specific partners that were developing devices, it really could have worked. Such as Blackberry and Nokia. Some of the things there were doing were actually quite good. Such as controlling the development of their phones as to maintain a specific bar of quality across devices. Microsoft also at this point has the capacity to create and source their own hardware as shown with their Surface line of products. If they are willing to actually go through with it and eat dirt, they still can integrate from the bottom to the top in a way few software companies can at this point. They also have experience with integrating phones both in government and in business. And although it's been years, they could probably still flex their muscles to get some of those partners back on board.


Outside of that, I'm sure the Chinese government has an interest in creating a state device.
 
Last edited:
Why would developers develop apps on a new platform without enough customers? Why would customers buy phones using this platform without the apps?

With most people now having accounts that's very tied to Google, if Google acts anti-competitively and not develop apps for that platform (YouTube especially) and then ban all third party development for those apps (like they did with Microsoft though Microsoft had followed every requirement from Google to build the YouTube app - unlike Amazon when they did), it'll be hard for that platform to survive.

I think a third platform could be made if it partnered up with either Apple or Google. Like if there's an open source or free source alternative to Android but it has Apple's backing with an Apple developed iMessage, FaceTime, animoji apps on that platform, that alternative might have a chance. Or if an alternative that partners up with Google, most likely having to promise Google to pass lots of spying data to Google, and Google developed apps on that platform, it might make a dent; but this is the less likely scenario consider how Google fucked Microsoft and Amazon at every turn.
 
I don't see any other options besides Android of iOS... not anytime soon.
 
Full blown Windows may be an option in the future. Since Windows does work on ARM it's possible. That would make docking a phone rather awesome experience. It will definitely happen at some point but not yet.
 
Tup3x said:
Full blown Windows may be an option in the future. Since Windows does work on ARM it's possible. That would make docking a phone rather awesome experience. It will definitely happen at some point but not yet.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that Microsoft lost all interest in the mobile phones market.
 
Tup3x said:
Full blown Windows may be an option in the future. Since Windows does work on ARM it's possible. That would make docking a phone rather awesome experience. It will definitely happen at some point but not yet.
Click to expand...

I can only see that happening if a few things happen.

To start: it needs to guarantee cutting-edge hardware. Windows Phone/Mobile failed in part because the devices were usually just running whatever Snapdragon chip had been available in Android phones several months earlier, and in some cases they were literally just warmed-over Android phones (like some of Samsung's Ativ devices). Microsoft needs phones that are using the latest chips while they're new -- in other words, they should be shipping the same time as the latest Galaxy S or G-series phone.

It needs aggressive software development. Not Windows Phone/Mobile development, where it was perpetually trailing Android and iOS, but constant, aggressive upgrades. It won't gain share unless people are wondering "why doesn't my phone have that?"

The last one, and this is the big one... Microsoft must ensure access to all the major apps (such as Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Alexa, and yes, YouTube). It should be prepared to spend several billion or more to lock in app development for the next five or more years, and spend several billion more if it has to. A phone platform really doesn't stand a chance now unless you simply don't have to wonder whether or not your favorite app is there. And this may be the thing that prevents Microsoft from jumping back in, because it may have to back dozens or hundreds of apps for several years or more.
 
Aurelius said:
I can only see that happening if a few things happen.

To start: it needs to guarantee cutting-edge hardware. Windows Phone/Mobile failed in part because the devices were usually just running whatever Snapdragon chip had been available in Android phones several months earlier, and in some cases they were literally just warmed-over Android phones (like some of Samsung's Ativ devices). Microsoft needs phones that are using the latest chips while they're new -- in other words, they should be shipping the same time as the latest Galaxy S or G-series phone.

It needs aggressive software development. Not Windows Phone/Mobile development, where it was perpetually trailing Android and iOS, but constant, aggressive upgrades. It won't gain share unless people are wondering "why doesn't my phone have that?"

The last one, and this is the big one... Microsoft must ensure access to all the major apps (such as Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Alexa, and yes, YouTube). It should be prepared to spend several billion or more to lock in app development for the next five or more years, and spend several billion more if it has to. A phone platform really doesn't stand a chance now unless you simply don't have to wonder whether or not your favorite app is there. And this may be the thing that prevents Microsoft from jumping back in, because it may have to back dozens or hundreds of apps for several years or more.
Click to expand...
like I said before, Google will not be helpful at all. First Google refused to develop YouTube on WP. Then Microsoft developed it themselves. Then Google blocked it because it somehow violated the developer agreement. Then Microsoft followed the agreement to the letter. It then got blocked anyway because Microsoft?!? Seriously, Google is anti-competitive.
 
CHANG3D said:
like I said before, Google will not be helpful at all. First Google refused to develop YouTube on WP. Then Microsoft developed it themselves. Then Google blocked it because it somehow violated the developer agreement. Then Microsoft followed the agreement to the letter. It then got blocked anyway because Microsoft?!? Seriously, Google is anti-competitive.
Click to expand...

My thinking is that Google might be more compliant when EU regulators have already slapped it with an antitrust penalty. Microsoft might get what it wants knowing that Google is terrified of another antitrust case forcing it to open up.
 
Considering they pulled YouTube from Amazon and then blocked Amazon's own app recently, all because Amazon developed the Echo Show first, I don't think Google would. It's not like EU will come to defend Microsoft or Amazon against Google. Now if a tiny company try to develop their own app and Google blocked it too, then EU might help.
 
Tup3x said:
Full blown Windows may be an option in the future. Since Windows does work on ARM it's possible. That would make docking a phone rather awesome experience. It will definitely happen at some point but not yet.
Click to expand...

No dedicated app store, no Win32 development anymore, it's a dead end.
 
dan1 said:
No dedicated app store, no Win32 development anymore, it's a dead end.
Click to expand...
I said full Windows. It has all of those things. In fact, anyone could make a device like that right now. It wouldn't be very mobile friendly but someone could make their own apps for basic mobile usage. Docked it would obviously work like any other ARM Windows 10 laptop.
 
It has an app store that developers don't write for. Win32 development is dead. And a jack of all trades, master of none device isn't something that would sell. No one is looking for a 3rd ecosystem and especially one with full blown Windows on it - all the problems of Windows, now on your phone!
 
dan1 said:
It has an app store that developers don't write for. Win32 development is dead. And a jack of all trades, master of none device isn't something that would sell. No one is looking for a 3rd ecosystem and especially one with full blown Windows on it - all the problems of Windows, now on your phone!
Click to expand...


That last part is one reason why Windows on phones (and initially, tablets) failed -- Microsoft overestimated the value of having Windows.

"It's Windows!" Yeah, Mr. Ballmer, you may think the mere mention of Windows makes people weak at the knees, but here in real life people associate Windows with complexity, headaches, malware... work. They turn to their mobile devices to get away from those things. Apple and Google kicked Microsoft's ass in that department precisely because they introduced relative simplicity and stability, and were focused more on fun things like social networks, photography and games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top