Windows, Apple and Chromebooks are all proprietary platforms. With PC you also have the choice to install Linux, which is the categorical difference. With smartphones there's not really an open choice available.
I specifically didn't mention Linux because Linux isn't a realistic choice for the average consumer, though. Realistic choices come commonly pre-installed and works with a range of things without much work for the end consumer. Most folks don't have the choice to install it due to lack of technical competence anyway. Even folks with the technical know-how often enough don't due to, well, ease of use issues.
(Yes, I know you can buy computers without an OS and you can buy computes with Linux as well - but not enough to be realistic for most folks. I'm pretty sure you can buy phones with a different OS as well but again, not realistic choices).
The issue isn't using it, it's getting it set up, working with all hardware, getting everything that's needed installed across different repositories, configuring everything the way it's needed, then keeping it running, survive updates, and fixing it when it breaks, which desktop Linux is still very prone to (apt dependency conflicts have wrecked beyond repair many Linux installs I've run).
At some point, you have to have a pretty deep understanding of how Linux and computers work to Google the right things, and then understand and apply a fix – or worse, you may have to work out one on your own, which may entail things like reading source code and patching stuff; I'd say I'm somewhat competent as far as running Linux goes, and I've had numerous issues over the years that I was unable to fix, mundane but non-negotiable things like "getting sound to work". Best case, that'll just require more or less heavy command line usage, which only a tiny minority of people have ever used before and which is highly non-intuitive at first.
That amounts to building a very comprehensive set of skills that is completely worthless to most people otherwise, and that you don't need for Windows or macOS, let alone Android/iOS.
Even though that's kinda sad, I don't expect to see any (relevant, mass-market, used by the general public) truly open alternative in the foreseeable future. The market just doesn't seem to be there for it.
On PCs, already pretty much no one uses Linux outside of tech bubbles (and even there, seems like it's behind both Windows and macOS [0]), apparently somewhere around 1-2% [1] among the general population; in practice, it feels like it should be even less, at least based on what mainstream websites I'm familiar with see. And this is for general-purpose computers, where an open OS might have tangible benefits for the general, non-developer/ops public (not sure which, but I guess such a case could be made) – but phones don't seem to be general-purpose computers for most; it seems they're used for media consumption, taking photos, communication, maybe some light gaming, and not much else – all thinks where the existing walled gardens offer a very compelling experience with assurances for security and quality that open platforms might have a hard time delivering.
A truly open smartphone platform would probably face an even harder uphill battle than desktop Linux, and that's already failed to gain traction time and again. You'd need compatible apps for it to gain traction, but who's going to make those? It'd have to offer a really polished UX, I don't see many people picking a clunky, ugly, bug-ridden phone based on GPL vs. proprietary – lots of people (including me) buy iPhones in part because they enjoy their design and UX. How do you make sure apps aren't scattered across lots of malware-infested app stores? How do you make sure people don't inadvertently shoot themselves in the foot all the time if you don't wall them off from choices that might lead to that? But how do you wall off people on a platform that is truly open? And so on, and so on. Unless some tech giant decides their interests align very much with a truly open and relevant mobile OS, I have a hard time seeing it happen – and even then.
The current tech world is much different from when the major desktop environments solidified; this time around, the vast, overwhelming, huge majority of computer users are not enthusiasts or IT professionals anymore like in the 90s, but completely uninterested and uninvested in the tech apart from having it work for them to do relatively simple tasks, similar to what most people outside of the relevant enthusiast bubbles feel towards cars or stoves. I don't want to run Emacs on my stove and maybe blow myself up in the process, I want it to work reliably and safely and just heat my food. I'd actully like no one to be able to tinker at will with safety-critical software in their cars, because their segfaulting Formula 1 brake patch they got from some Facebook page might mean they plow into me and I die.
It would be a challenge to gain a foothold for sure. I suspect the way in would be to have a way to support Android apps (I believe windows phone was doing this for a while?)
As far as malware, I’m not sure why it would be more of an issue on an open platform than it would on Android. I use Linux as a daily driver, and as long as you’re getting software from trusted sources, it’s not much of a concern. I don’t see why it would be different on mobile.
And with regard to you comments about ease of use, I’m not saying an open phone OS should be the only option, or that it should even be the dominant platform. For most people it probably makes sense to go with a widely supported platform which is safe and easy to use. But it would be nice if there was an alternative available for power users, and people who want to experiment with radically different concepts of how to use a smartphone.
Smartphones are basically the main computers people use nowadays. It’s just kind of a shame you have to go through a corporation to use one.
> As far as malware, I’m not sure why it would be more of an issue on an open platform than it would on Android.
> I use Linux as a daily driver, and as long as you’re getting software from trusted sources, it’s not much of a concern. I don’t see why it would be different on mobile.
Not sure if that's true – doesn't Google keep the Play store mostly free of serious malware? Apart from stunts like sideloading Fortnite, I'd expect the vast majority of Android users to get all their apps from the Play Store, so that should be reasonably safe. Of course, Google can pretty much force everyone into the Play Store by denying access to Play services and their huge customer base if you don't, so it's a one-stop shop for next to everyone.
But if every company, publisher, developer may host their own, including their own OpenPlay Services, how do you tell what is a trustworthy source? How do you tell if OpenRando Store is trustworthy when a Google search tells you it has this TokTuk app you've heard of? This isn't like server Linux, where most people are reasonably careful with what they install, sources are relatively few and policed well, and people tend to be at least somewhat knowledgeable, so tricking them is quite hard; this also isn't like desktop Linux, which doesn't have market share. This would be a reasonably large mobile platform used by everyone and their grandma to run a large part of their lives.
I'm quite sure most people wouldn't want to have to have a thorough understanding of how apps, app stores, installs, updates, the OS, typical malware, scams etc. work, just so they have a chance at noticing when things are off in some way. I've next to no idea how iOS works, and that's fine with me, and I'm someone who runs Kubernetes clusters for fun. Whoever spares people from having to have that knowledge and do that work and actively manage their phone like a piece of complicated corporate IT equipment will get all the users; they'd get me, for sure. My phone really just has to work and be secure.
> But if every company, publisher, developer may host their own, including their own OpenPlay Services, how do you tell what is a trustworthy source?
This is exactly the situation you have now with Android: anyone can install an APK from anywhere if they want to.
As far as establishing trustworthy sources, I would imagine this would work a lot like using Apt on debian. You could have a trusted package manager where there is some vetting process for getting listed, and you would trust the community to identify and report malicious packages quickly.
Also unlike the app store or google play, you'd likely be running mostly open source software you can inspect yourself if you want to make sure it's safe.
