> Surely there is a market for such a device. 1% of a billion is a big number.
>* Are manufacturers a cartel and won't allow breaking the duopoly? (Doesn't seem plausible, Samsung toyed with Tizen)
I don't think it's a simple duopoly, but an application of Conway's law across the whole globalized tech industry [1]. Keep in mind that originally Android was the open source option, and it's been gradually become less and less amenable to that.
In my mind, I think of the "progress" of the consumer electronics industry (especially in the last 20 years) as undergoing constant and aggressive "distillation" process, converting people away from the FOSS side of the spectrum which offers freedom and control towards the locked down centralization side which offers dependence, convenience, and safety. The 1% market is basically the left over Azeotrope that can't quite be gotten rid of.
The experiments to harness that 1% market are the exception that proves the rule. Locked down centralized solutions are optimal for the tech market as it exists today. Samsung thought they could squeeze some money out of the 1% by being the "master" of Tizen, but realized that the game theory works out such that they would be better off as a servant of Android.
On top of all that, I think as the smartphone capture gets deeper and deeper, being in 1% is not even necessarily a 1-to-1 for FOSS values anymore. I used to fantasize about having a cool handheld Linux computer I could control freely. Now I'm more obsessed than ever about avoiding globalized tech, but I just don't care about smartphones anymore. I carry around an iPhone as the mark of the beast, but at least (I tell myself) I don't let it into my soul.
>* Are manufacturers a cartel and won't allow breaking the duopoly? (Doesn't seem plausible, Samsung toyed with Tizen)
I don't think it's a simple duopoly, but an application of Conway's law across the whole globalized tech industry [1]. Keep in mind that originally Android was the open source option, and it's been gradually become less and less amenable to that.
In my mind, I think of the "progress" of the consumer electronics industry (especially in the last 20 years) as undergoing constant and aggressive "distillation" process, converting people away from the FOSS side of the spectrum which offers freedom and control towards the locked down centralization side which offers dependence, convenience, and safety. The 1% market is basically the left over Azeotrope that can't quite be gotten rid of.
The experiments to harness that 1% market are the exception that proves the rule. Locked down centralized solutions are optimal for the tech market as it exists today. Samsung thought they could squeeze some money out of the 1% by being the "master" of Tizen, but realized that the game theory works out such that they would be better off as a servant of Android.
On top of all that, I think as the smartphone capture gets deeper and deeper, being in 1% is not even necessarily a 1-to-1 for FOSS values anymore. I used to fantasize about having a cool handheld Linux computer I could control freely. Now I'm more obsessed than ever about avoiding globalized tech, but I just don't care about smartphones anymore. I carry around an iPhone as the mark of the beast, but at least (I tell myself) I don't let it into my soul.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law