> "Sure, but did the market reject it because it was a more open platform, or because of other considerations?"
My point was that openness didn't outweigh other considerations in the eyes of people purchasing them.
Windows Mobile smartphones were actually dominant in the market until the iPhone was introduced. IIRC from the industry data I had access to, there were over 100 different models in a variety of form factors from a couple dozen OEMs concurrently being sold at its peak. So it was at least ahead of all the alternatives before that point, which weakens the argument that it was "other considerations" that were the main culprit.
They weren't as open as you remember for most people using pre-iPhone smart phones. Carriers did all sorts of things to cripple reduce functionality so they could sell it back to you.
A major factor of the iPhone's early US success was forcing a major US carrier (AT&T) to stop doing consumer hostile things and just let the device connect to the network as intended.
So, in part, it was improved openness that drove iPhone/Android's success. It just was network openness instead of device openness.
My point was that openness didn't outweigh other considerations in the eyes of people purchasing them.
Windows Mobile smartphones were actually dominant in the market until the iPhone was introduced. IIRC from the industry data I had access to, there were over 100 different models in a variety of form factors from a couple dozen OEMs concurrently being sold at its peak. So it was at least ahead of all the alternatives before that point, which weakens the argument that it was "other considerations" that were the main culprit.