It feels like there is a wide open opportunity for some new OS's to enter the mainstream marketplace. I see nothing but dissatisfaction with the incumbents.

▲

darkwater a day ago | parent | next [-]

We still have problems with websites only working on Chrome, moving to a new - or grow an already existing one - open mobile ecosystem in 2026 and beyond it's going to be much more difficult than the Year of Desktop Linux, unfortunately :(

▲

awkwardleon a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's so much lock-in/captive-audience on these platforms I don't see this happening with mobile phones as they exist today. The only thing that will crack it is the "Next Big Thing"™, and who knows what/when that will be (AR glasses? Brain chips? Some AI wearable?)?

▲

freedomben a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I want what you say to be true, but realistically it's not because of the "security" features available to app developers, and the fact that so many companies (even government!) have moved to mandatory apps. I don't know how we ever get past that with a new OS.

▲

curt15 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Will the new OSs be able overcome Apple and Google lobbies to restrict banking apps to "secure" (i.e. under their control) devices?

▲

preisschild a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are android distributions like Graphene OS and LineageOS that are completely open. The problem is application developers that specifically restrict their apps to only run on google/apple certified hard-/software

	▲	einpoklum a day ago \| parent [-]
		But Graphene and Lineage don't support on most phones. If phone makers were to be more forthcoming and cooperative, they could get one or both of those, or some mobile-phone-oriented Linux distro, to work and then Bob's our uncle.

▲

lapcat a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In order to enter the mainstream market and challenge the consumer OS duopolies, a new OS needs at least two things:

1. Retail presence

2. A large advertising budget

This is why it's so difficult to challenge the existing duopolies on desktop and mobile. If a consumer can't walk into a retail store, see a device on the showroom floor with the new OS installed by default, and buy a device with the new OS installed by default, then the new OS has zero chance of becoming mainstream.

Among other reasons, this is why Linux has failed to go mainstream. Linux has no retail presence, and it's not advertising to consumers.

▲

takluyver a day ago | parent [-]

And to underscore the scale of that challenge, Microsoft couldn't make Windows Phone a significant competitor to Android & iOS.

▲

lapcat a day ago | parent [-]

I suspect the app ecosystem was a problem with Windows Phone. iOS and Android already had a head start of a few years, with Windows Phone not appearing until late 2010, and "Windows" was a bit of a misnomer, because desktop Windows apps couldn't run on the phone, so the preexisting software ecosystem didn't help.

	▲	takluyver 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Certainly the app ecosystem was part of the challenge, and Microsoft spent a fair bit of effort trying to both encourage developers to make apps, and filling obvious gaps (like Youtube) itself. If their resources, retail connections and brand recognition weren't enough, it's hard to imagine that anyone else stands much chance until conditions change drastically.

▲

bigyabai a day ago | parent | prev [-]

We have other mobile OSes, even ones that support Android apps like Jolla and PostmarketOS. People don't use them.

	▲	safety1st a day ago \| parent [-]
		Tell this to my banks (whose apps are the only way you can even pay at some businesses nowadays)