As a seasoned tech enthusiast with a lifelong passion for gadgets and innovation, I can’t help but feel a pang of nostalgia when reading about the potential for a more open Android platform. Having grown up in an era where Microsoft was a dominant force in personal computing, it’s heartbreaking to see the company struggling to make its mark on mobile devices.
The Windows Phone platform no longer exists. It’s something we all understand now. Regardless of our feelings, the reality is that the smartphone market has come to be dominated by two major players: iOS and Android.
Globally, Apple’s dominance in the U.S. tech industry and the western phone market is not replicated. The Android operating system, used by Google, has a vast user base due to its accessibility for various smartphone manufacturers worldwide. In contrast, iOS, exclusive to iPhone, is more expensive, limiting its global reach, especially in smaller economies where cost is a significant factor. Android devices are also popular in Europe and the Far East, with Samsung leading the market outside of the U.S., although it has faced challenges from rising competition from Chinese brands like Huawei and Oppo.
Essentially, Microsoft appears absent from the current smartphone scene, with only a few outdated Android apps remaining as remnants of their mobile ambitions. The Microsoft Launcher for Android has seen little development beyond a somewhat underwhelming Copilot integration, and it still carries significant bugs on Samsung devices that have gone unresolved for years. SwiftKey, once a favorite keyboard app, now seems neglected. The Surface Duo 2, their folding phone, was also left behind, never updated to the latest Android versions, and may now pose a security risk if used.
Yet, having very little presence on mobile I would argue is a huge issue for Microsoft. And sure, Microsoft’s early investment in OpenAI stands to generate revenue for the company effectively in perpetuity, even if it does nothing. But Microsoft’s abandonment of the “mobile computing” endpoint has effectively given the keys to its future away to competitor companies. OpenAI, Apple, Google, and others are set to direct the ebb and flow of consumer AI, not Microsoft. Microsoft is also locked out of expanding its “Xbox everywhere” approach, with Apple and Google blocking Xbox Cloud Gaming.
Looking back, it’s clear that Microsoft’s decision to discontinue Windows Phone was hasty. Since they didn’t invest significantly in this area, they lack the power to influence competitors when it comes to shaping the future of mobile gaming, artificial intelligence for consumers, or consumer technology as a whole. They can’t be the default app on many devices, but there could be an upcoming opportunity that might alter this situation.
Let’s go crazy and indulge me in some thought experiments for a moment.
The DOJ might be creating the right conditions for an actually profitable Microsoft Android phone (maybe, possibly)
The U.S. Department of Justice is suggesting solutions to potentially break up Google’s monopolies, much like what was done with Microsoft in the late 90s regarding Internet Explorer. This could lead to a scenario where Microsoft, at that time, had to present users with a choice of browsers when opening Windows, effectively ending Internet Explorer’s reign as the world’s leading browser and boosting the viability of MSN (now Bing) as a search engine.
As Google’s Chrome browser became increasingly dominant with Google as the default search engine, other companies found it difficult to gather the necessary query data to create effective search algorithms. Now, U.S. officials believe that allowing Google to control both the browser market and its search engine monopoly might have been a mistake. They argue that Google has been misusing its search and advertising monopoly to boost its own products and services. As a result, they are advocating for “behavioral remedies” and other measures to encourage competition in this area.
Currently, Google is challenging the decision, as the U.S. Department of Justice has proposed that Google should share its search data with competitors, end exclusive deals like being the default search engine on devices such as the iPhone’s Safari, and even consider selling off Google Chrome. The effectiveness of these solutions in promoting competition is a contentious issue since the DOJ’s actions might inadvertently grant Google more power over search by requiring others to rely on its search data to remain competitive. At present, Google dominates approximately 90% of the market, with Microsoft Bing trailing far behind at around 5%. However, today we won’t delve into the specifics of search, though it is an essential part of the equation.
It appears that Microsoft faces a challenge because it can’t make its apps the default option on devices, which hinders people from encountering its products. The debate over Microsoft Edge being forced as the default browser in Windows 11 has been ongoing, but making Google dominate the entire internet isn’t necessarily an appealing solution. (It’s worth noting that Microsoft Edge is quite impressive these days, to be fair).
Either way, this isn’t about necessarily simply railing on Google (as fun as it is). People use Chrome because it’s arguably the best. People use Google because it is also the best. The issue is that competing products aren’t even given the vaguest opportunity to grow and offer something different. That’s why Microsoft was forced to give up Internet Explorer’s dominance in the first place. It was holding the internet back. Arguably, Google could also be holding the internet back, wiping entire businesses off the face of the Earth at a mere whim when it changes its algorithm without solid explanations. What if there were other, better ways to do search? We’d never know, simply because companies can’t get the data they need to build a viable global search model. What would Bing look like if it actually had the data it needed in order to offer more accurate results? Bing generally performs well for easy searches, but stumbles when it comes to granular, detailed, or local search results.
In a scenario where Google could be compelled to provide an advantage to its rivals in the search market, Microsoft might find a slight chance to challenge not just in search, but potentially mobile hardware as well. A significant portion of Android’s profitability model is derived from the user data collected through Chrome and Google Play apps. Interestingly, the Department of Justice (DOJ) had previously considered mandating Google to sell Android itself.
What if Android was truly open?
Google’s Pixel smartphone line has increased in popularity over the years, although it remains quite small compared to the likes of Samsung. One advantage Google has here is that its hardware is subsidized to some degree, since it controls the Google Play Store where apps and games are delivered. Pixel phones thus can either undercut competitors, or enjoy better margins on software sales, and by wielding the search data monopolistically (allegedly). Samsung phones have the Galaxy Store, but it’s not the default app store, and it’s not really something people generally use.
Google mandates that devices running its variant of Android pre-install all Google apps and services as default options. Although it’s possible for users to change these defaults, such as transforming a Samsung Galaxy into a Microsoft Galaxy by opting for Microsoft Edge, Microsoft Launcher, Microsoft Authenticator, etc., most users are unlikely to make such changes.
The proposed changes by the DOJ concerning Android’s behavior primarily involve search functions, although Google encountered a similar issue regarding its Google Play Store recently. Microsoft has hinted at launching its own app/game store on Android following this ruling; however, this plan was put on hold as Google appeals the decision. It appears that Microsoft is eager to enter the mobile market, they’re just biding their time for the opportune moment.
Clearly Microsoft wants to be in mobile, it’s just waiting for the right time.
The issue with building devices on Google’s Android revolve around those pesky rules. Google takes 30% of all transactions that run through Google Play, and its “default app” status makes it the dominant place for developers to build services. It also has very anti-competitive rules baked into it. For example, Amazon can’t sell books through its Kindle app on Google Play, despite the fact Google can sell books through Google Books on Google Play. Microsoft can’t sell cloud games on the Xbox app on Android, despite the fact Google shut down its own cloud gaming service.
As a researcher, I find myself often pondering about the impact of Google’s dominant role in the default app market on platforms such as Twitch, Spotify, and numerous others. This dominance not only restricts but also extends to its control over search engines, making Google the gatekeeper for data flowing through these applications and services. In turn, this information aids Google in determining which ads are most suitable for my online journey.
As an enthusiast, I’d express it like this:
Alas, ’tis but a dream
The Department of Justice indicates that if Google’s separation of Chrome and search licensing doesn’t stimulate enough competition, it may require Google to divest Android as well. An open version of Android, either through behavioral adjustments or a spin-off, could provide Microsoft with its ultimate opportunity to develop a rival phone and consequently offer its own apps and services as the default option. This would be Microsoft’s last opportunity to interact with consumers on their mobile devices instead of computers. It would also be the only means for users to get familiar with services like Microsoft Copilot, making it a significant milestone for offerings such as Microsoft Edge, Bing Search, and Xbox Cloud Gaming. However, even if Google were to split off Android, it’s highly improbable that this will occur.
Microsoft’s dedicated hardware innovator and phone aficionado, Panos Panay, departed the company in search of new opportunities, following Microsoft’s decreasing focus on creating its own hardware ecosystem. Although Microsoft continues to manufacture Surface tablet PCs, their popularity pales in comparison to a few years ago. The planned Surface Duo 3 was scrapped, and the Surface Neo tablet never made it to production.
Instead of the Surface Duo being an unusual device whose sophisticated hardware didn’t align with the operating system it was intended for, consider a more conventional smartphone, specifically designed from scratch for Microsoft apps, and featuring a Microsoft-centric Android app store that offers developers a more attractive revenue share compared to Google. This phone would serve as a testing ground for Microsoft to innovate on practical AI solutions that can fit into your pocket and be accessible at all times, rather than being confined to a desktop. It’s hard to imagine how Microsoft Copilot will gain popularity when tied to desktops, given the numerous day-to-day use cases of smartphones. On the other hand, today’s Android, controlled by Google, seems unlikely to serve as a viable platform for Microsoft (or any newcomer) to develop a smartphone on. However, this scenario might change if the U.S. regulatory bodies fully opened up Android. But with a new election over and priorities changing, this article may simply be an exploration of “what could’ve been” in terms of a hypothetical Surface Phone. Dreaming about it is still enjoyable, though.
What do you think? Hit the comments, let’s chat.
Read More
- ZK PREDICTION. ZK cryptocurrency
- DYM PREDICTION. DYM cryptocurrency
- POPCAT PREDICTION. POPCAT cryptocurrency
- UXLINK PREDICTION. UXLINK cryptocurrency
- JASMY PREDICTION. JASMY cryptocurrency
- Top gainers and losers
- TURBO PREDICTION. TURBO cryptocurrency
- XRP PREDICTION. XRP cryptocurrency
- VINU/USD
- Arcane season 2 review: Tensions escalate in gripping second instalment
2024-11-26 18:39