[melange]

That is true. And is clearly true in the tablet space too (as well as PCs). It's just a lot more nuanced in both directions.

Android can have higher unit share and 'inferior' products while Apple can have higher profit share and the 'best' (single inflexible) product, almost indefinitely because they are satisfying different needs.

Which raises the question: where is there actual competition?

Clearly Samsung and Apple are competing for some of the same customers, but the overlap is small compared to the overall market.

[danmaz74]

Yes, and I have no problem with that. I don't wish Apple to fail - I just don't want it to dominate the market alone.

[melange]

Given that Apple are nowhere near doing that and don't seem to be even going for that, why is that even a concern?

We have far more of a problem with Google in that regard, who do absolutely dominate search, and have clearly stated their wish to unseat Apple in order to have total dominance of mobile too.

[danmaz74]

Well, considering their patent litigations, I wouldn't say that Apple try to do that.

As for Google, I'm less worried because there is much less lock-in, both in search and with an OS that is mostly open sourced.

[melange]

Search is entirely locked in.

[danmaz74]

How so? Switching is just an URL away...

[melange]

Gibberish.

There is no alternative URL to click on because a competitive global search engine would cost billions of dollars to build, the space is deeply encumbered by Google's giant patent portfolio, and the information used to build the index is to a great extent no longer available on the web.

That's why Bing is a distant second and there are no other players.