Circa late 1980s: Microsoft have just set the ball rolling for their future by releasing OS/2, whose development was a joint venture with IBM, to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).
IBM helped develop the software. It hoped it would help to drive sales of their hardware, but failed to negotiate exclusive rights with Microsoft for its use. Healthy sales from OEMs prompts Microsoft to realise that releasing software to the open hardware market is the business to be in, so they prioritise development of their own Windows software and release version 3.0 to OEMs. It sells well, and their relationship with IBM is over.
It was by allowing OEMs to undercut each other on hardware prices, that within 10 years, PCs went from being too expensive to commodity items. All different types of machines all running Windows software: great for casual users, as programs work and are all PC compatible; but annoying for power users, as how can you optimise for a system when you don’t have control of its hardware? You will remember buggy device drivers from lazy device manufacturers causing blue screens of death. Sticking to a rigid set of APIs for developers to follow stifles innovation.
How has this got any relevance to Apple and smartphones?
Apple has always played differently. They simply refuse to open up their software to OEMs and kept a tight control of their hardware. Some analysts may have critiqued this: they might say, “Apple makes such great software, why don’t they open it up to PCs?”. I argue that it is the tight control of hardware that enables Apple to make great software. They maintain and control the software for the hardware they control. This is great for users, however unlike value PC brands, quality comes first for Apple and that comes at a price – leaving Microsoft to get a monopoly on the PC market.
Circa 2010: Apple iOS and Google Android are competing in the mobile market for market share and developers.
Today, I see Google playing Microsoft and Apple the same as ever. Yet in mobile space the game is different, people are more than ever concerned with usability and performance. Developers are power users, willing to invest in quality phones and spend their time more heavily developing for quality systems. As Apple have maintained control of their OS, it is easy for Apple to optimise it for their hardware. They have set form factors and capabilities and greater opportunities for low level software optimisation. There is only one tablet form factor, only one hand-held form factor. There is only one App Store, and for Apps to be added they have to play by the rules.
On complete contrast, Google have open sourced it’s OS. Any mobile OEM can implement it, similar to the PC market. This makes it more difficult for device manufacturers implementing Android to achieve the same level of fit and finish. Even if they do come close, being mostly outside the development of the OS ensures long waits for end users to see upgrades on their phones if they see any at all. They can come in any kind of form factor and OS version, fragmenting the market for developers.
While I expect Android devices to make smartphones commodities; friends of people with iPhones will envy the fit and finish they enjoy and might consider upgrading to one when their contract ends. People upgrade phones faster than computers and Apple have had a head start. Developers have hopped on board and will continue to enjoy developing for the OS they see as best in the market.