[tambourine_man]

I have 70% of Android global market share. It offers more choices of devices, price points and a less restrictive OS.

There's almost nothing you can do on an iPhone that you can't on an Android. Conversely, there are plenty of things that the more open Android platform allows that iOS doesn't.

And yet, despite all of that, some people still prefer to buy iPhones. I think it's their choice to make.

[ghusto]

I didn't buy an iPhone because of the "security" that the restrictions give me, and I suspect few others who jumped ship from Android to iPhone did either.

I switched because the iPhone does what I need it to do, and then gets out of the way. It works as I need it to with my Mac, and is for the most part intuitive and well thought out. I would prefer it if I could install what I wanted from where I wanted, but it's a price I'm willing to pay. And no, allowing me to do so would not undermine any of the value I've pointed out.

I bought an iPhone _despite_ the restrictions, not because of them.

[tambourine_man]

> allowing me to do so would not undermine any of the value I've pointed out.

That’s a hard claim to make. The “just works”, “gets out of your way”, nature is very much helped by a closed and restrictive ecosystem.

[addicted]

This can clearly be shown to be false.

People said the exact same thing for decades for why they preferred Macs over Windows.

The Mac was an extremely open ecosystem.

That did not stop it from “just work”ing or “getting out of your way”.

[tambourine_man]

The Mac “just works” compared to Windows, which is a low bar.

Compared to iOS, the Mac is a complete mess, just ask any non technical user.

There's a reason why AppStores are a huge success in the mobile world and why few people dared to install anything on PCs and Macs.

[ghusto]

When I want to use Firefox with Kagi as the default search engine on Mac, it just works. Have you seen the crap you have to do on an iPhone to add Kagi to the Firefox skin of Webkit?

[lapcat]

> There's almost nothing you can do on an iPhone that you can't on an Android.

1. This is false. There are plenty of features and apps (including my own apps!) that are exclusive to iPhone. iMessage and iCloud for example.

2. Products are not simply lists of features. There's also something important called design.

3. Don't forget vendor hardware support, software support, and resale value.

I can say, from a personal perspective, that I didn't buy an iPhone because it's vendor locked. I bought an iPhone because I'm a Mac user and developer, so I was already in the Apple ecosystem.

I suspect that there are a lot of people who buy an iPhone simply because their family and/or friends have iPhones already.

[tambourine_man]

Regarding 1, there are plenty of alternatives to iMessage and iCloud. They are even interoperable to some degree.

Essencial apps were made for Windows only back in 95-2005. Your only choice was emulation and there were no alternatives. It’s a completely different picture today.

2 and 3 are not relevant to monopoly claims.

[lapcat]

> Regarding 1, there are plenty of alternatives to iMessage and iCloud

So? The alternatives to iMessage and iCloud are different from them in a number of ways, just like iOS and Android are different in a number of ways. They're not identical alternatives.

> 2 and 3 are not relevant to monopoly claims.

We're not discussing monopoly claims. We're discussing why people buy iPhones.

[tambourine_man]

> They're not identical alternatives

Alternatives are not identical, by definition.

You see, in 95-2005 you couldn't compute without Windows. The vast majority of services not only assumed but relied upon you having Windows installed. There were no alternatives. Full stop. It's a completely different situation today.

> We're not discussing monopoly claims.

I am, and so is EU.

> We're discussing why people buy iPhones.

And why they are making a conscious choice, not being hostage by a monopoly.

[lapcat]

> Alternatives are not identical, by definition.

Ok, so if you admit that the alternatives to iMessage and iCloud are not identical, it follows that people may have reasons for specifically preferring iMessage and iCloud to the alternatives, based on the differences that you admit exist. And again, iMessage and iCloud are iPhone-only features, so a preference for those Apple services would naturally make consumers prefer iPhones.

> I am, and so is EU.

By "We're not discussing monopoly claims", I meant specifically "We" as in you and me. I'm not discussing anything with the EU, because the EU doesn't comment on HN. My original reply to you was specifically about why people buy iPhones: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39591038

> And why they are making a conscious choice, not being hostage by a monopoly.

Yes? We're both already in agreement about that. The question is to what extent, if any, vendor lockdown of 3rd party apps drives iPhone sales.

You seem to want to claim that the only relevant difference for consumers between iPhones and Android phones is App Store lockdown, and that's simply not true. There are a bunch of relevant differences.

[tambourine_man]

> Yes? We're both already in agreement about that.

Ah, that wasn't clear to me.

Of course there are differences between the platforms, but not enough to justify legislation, IMO. Comparing current Apple to 95-2005 Microsoft is not useful. Mac and Linux users had to run Windows in one way or another to interoperate with the rest of the world in many situations back then. Not true for Android at all.

[consp]

> resale value

Even with the insane idiotic second hand Apple device prices, the refurbish shops are still going broke every time they show up, so I doubt it as good as people say.

[addicted]

Any evidence it’s because they prefer being prevented from installing certain apps they can get on Android?

IOW, is there any evidence that if the apps that are currently unavailable on iOS became available on iOS, iPhone sales would drop?

[tambourine_man]

If you ask a user if they want to be prevented from installing an app, they'll most likely reply “no”, of course. If, however, they wake up and their phone is not behaving as usual due to borderline malware app they inadvertently installed, most people would be pissed. The age old freedom/responsibility tension.

To my surprise, many people had a similar questioning like you did in this thread, so it's probably not as obvious as I imagined.