Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Don't iPhone users make just as many (probably more) Google searches as Android users? Or do you think that without Android, nobody would have put out cheap smartphones by now?


But if you replaced all the android devices with iphones, Apple would have HUGE leverage over Google.


It's quite possible there wouldn't be cheap smartphones without Android. At least, not ones with a decent browser. Meego imploded on its own, Palm took webOS down with it as a realistic option, and MS would probably never let the word "cheap" attach itself to Windows Mobile. What's left? Openmoko, maybe? And, just as importantly, if you assume the cheap smartphone makers wouldn't gang up and make their own platform, who else might have pushed a new, free, mobile OS other than Google? Funnily enough, the only other company I can think of who might have had a go at it is Amazon. Today I could see Facebook having a go, but where were they 7 years ago?

Then again, markets are funny things. In a world without Android, I can't imagine the expensive iOS ecosystem being the only game in town. Something might have filled the sucking void at the cheap end of the market, but what?


I realise I've effectively written Symbian off here. It's funny, it took me a good 5 minutes to even remember it existed. I suppose we could hypothesise that in a world without Android, the Nokia of 2009-2010 might have seen the light, but I think that's extremely unlikely.


Licensing Windows Mobile is what? $30 a unit? Less?

So without Android isn't it safe to assume HTC would still be pumping out Windows phones, perhaps at $389 retail rather than $349?


Yeah, but at sub-$100? Probably not.


Probably more? As far as I know, there are more Android devices in the market than iPhones.


Android users are not using their devices the same as iOS users:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/21/real-time-research-ios-domi...


No doubt, yet iPhone still generates more mobile web traffic than Android.


Apple charges Google for being the default search engine.


(Not implying you specifically, nor is it necessarily a bad thing...)

Interesting framing and perception - I've never read anyone say that "Mozilla charges Google for being the default Firefox search engine", it's always been "Google pays Firefox to be the default Firefox search engine".

Same result, really, but it's interesting how much of a change it implies, passive vs active, etc.


Sure, true enough. Though it's not like creating Android was free.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: