> "Bad thing has occurred previously, therefore nothing should be done about it"?

The solution isn’t degrading another company’s product or forcing them to do x when there’s already existing competition.

> That's what they're trying to do. "OS that people would actually want" is the one that runs their existing apps on their existing hardware. That's the thing the incumbents are blocking them from doing. "If you want to make a new OS you must first reproduce the entire hardware supply chain and replace the entire installed base of user devices with a new system that has no existing users" is basically saying that you're not allowed to do it.

I mean I just disagree here, I don’t know what else to say. People were fully aware of what Apple was when they bought the products, Apple didn’t trick anyone, or anything. They also are not the sole phone OEM and they don’t have a monopoly.

Other companies can step up and provide actual competitive hardware. There’s nothing stopping Samsung or (especially) Google from putting more effort into their lineups to match the performance, fit and finish that Apple users like. They’ve just settled for mediocrity in some aspects (i.e. Google holding onto their Tensor chips, or not improving the UX/UI of Android, or even improving its brand perception).

> If I create a messaging app…

Not the same thing at all as far as other OSes go, this is more applicable to something like allowing Chromium on iOS. The appropriate comparison would be if another OEMs OS had a messaging feature baked into their OS. Google attempted it (or still does?) and their branding and advertising are just so incredibly bad they do nothing to sway the average population.

I think like a lot of the HN users here, the Android and Linux OEMs and even companies like Framework are disconnected from the average consumer and can’t comprehend why people choose Apple and don’t care about all the technical stuff like an unlockable bootloader, installing apks, etc.

> Ma Bell never once advertised that you can use your own phone on their phone network.

Again, not the same thing as Apple holds nothing near a monopoly in the US or worldwide.

Then if there’s a good enough product for it, it’ll gain market share. People act like Apple was just miraculously granted market share over Blackberry and that they didn’t create a competitive product to earn that spot.

Linux phones are currently a subpar product and it’s not because of Apple. The device hardware sucks and the actual use of desktop Linux hammered into a mobile OS is an extremely poor experience even without app compatibility.

This isn’t permanent. We see the rise and fall of plenty of brands overtime (Nike, Mitsubishi, etc).

If your branding and product is good enough you can overcome this. I mean just look at social media networks too that constantly come in and out of the picture.

I really dislike the sheeple argument.

Actually they don't work because those apps suck. Typically the banks are responsible for preventing their own apps from working there. Because they don't care or because they follow some bullshit security-theatre policies, or because they just don't understand security, I don't know.

It's not Google that adds the code that makes your banking app fail: it's the goddamn bank itself.

But I agree with your point that the reason it sucks is not the AOSP-based system, and it's sad to blame the system when it's the app (or many times just Google) that is to blame.