The fate of Windows Phone is sealed. You know it, I know it, everyone does. Despite the sting of its departure, the tech community has come to terms with a mobile world ruled by the twin powers of iOS and Android.
Apple, the crown jewel of American tech, has long led the charge in the U.S. cell phone market, but globally, the scene diverges. Google’s Android is the undisputed global leader in mobile operating systems. This dominance is due to its availability to manufacturers across the spectrum, from budget-friendly models to high-end tech. iOS, restricted to iPhones, is quite the opposite—beautiful but expensive, giving Android a wide edge across many international markets. Places like Europe and the Far East have embraced Android, with Samsung reigning supreme outside United States borders. Even Samsung’s stronghold is being challenged by robust offerings from Chinese contenders like Huawei and Oppo.
Meanwhile, Microsoft is conspicuously absent from the mobile battleground. With only a few outdated Android apps to show, Microsoft has effectively stepped back from its smartphone endeavors. The Microsoft Launcher for Android hasn’t seen substantial updates in ages, and its performance is plagued by glitches on devices like Samsung’s that have never been addressed. The once-adored SwiftKey keyboard languishes without true innovation. Microsoft’s dual-screen Surface Duo 2 fell by the wayside, never receiving the latest Android enhancements, now a potential security risk.
It’s undeniable—Microsoft’s near-invisibility on mobile platforms is a critical oversight. Yes, their early investment in OpenAI will likely pay off handsomely, but abandoning mobile has handed competitors like Apple and Google the steering wheel for the future of consumer technology and AI. With Apple’s and Google’s barriers against Xbox Cloud Gaming, Microsoft’s “Xbox everywhere” strategy is more of a dream than a reality.
Hindsight is crystal clear. Even CEO Satya Nadella has expressed regret over the abrupt shutdown of Windows Phone. Without a stake in the mobile industry, Microsoft finds itself unable to influence the direction of mobile gaming, consumer AI, or tech at large. They’re not the default on countless potential devices. Yet, could there be a glimmer of opportunity on the horizon to turn the tide?
Allow me to indulge in a bit of speculation.
Currently, the U.S. Department of Justice is playing a familiar tune, looking to break up some of Google’s monopolistic practices, not unlike what Microsoft faced in the late 90s over Internet Explorer. Older folks might recall when Microsoft had to offer an array of browser options on a new Windows install, effectively knocking Internet Explorer from its lofty perch and bringing MSN’s search engine prominence to an untimely end.
With Google Chrome now at the top with Google Search as the default, others, Microsoft included, struggle to gather the search data essential to develop competitive algorithms. Now, the DOJ considers the tight relationship between Google’s browser and search engine a poor choice, accusing Google of using its dominance unfairly to further its range of products. “Behavioral remedies” and other measures to stir more competition are being discussed.
While Google is appealing these rulings, the DOJ suggests the company might have to license its search capabilities to rivals, stop cementing Google as the default engine (such as on iPhone’s Safari), and potentially let go of the Chrome browser. There’s debate over whether these remedies might strengthen competition or if they’d simply set everyone on Google’s terms regardless, ironically handing Google more control. At the moment, Google holds roughly 90% of the market, leaving Microsoft Bing far behind with just about 5%. However, today’s conversation isn’t solely about search, though it does play a role.
Microsoft’s absence from mobile app dominance undoubtedly limits their reach. Sure, there’s been noise surrounding Microsoft’s efforts to promote Edge as the default on Windows 11, but leaving Google at the helm of the digital world seems an unideal trade. Let’s not ignore that Edge has become pretty impressive recently, either.
It’s not just about Google, though. Chrome’s popularity springs from legitimate quality as does Google’s search engine. However, the lack of support for competitors stymies innovation. This is the same reason Internet Explorer had to relinquish its stranglehold: It slowed the internet’s progress. Similarly, Google’s control might be doing the same, tweaking its system on a whim and clouding the potential for innovation from others. Could there be superior ways to search? We might never know if companies can’t access the necessary data to compete. What would Bing accomplish if it had the resources to improve its accuracy beyond simply basic questions?
In an alternate reality where Google is perhaps compelled to give competitors a leg up, Microsoft might find itself with an unexpected shot to play once more in mobile hardware. Google’s profitable ecosystem heavily leans on user data from Chrome and Google Play. Once upon a time, the DOJ also pondered breaking up Android.
Imagine Android opened up for real.
Google’s own Pixel phones are beloved but small-time players next to Samsung’s might. Google’s advantage? Its hardware capitalizes on the Google Play Store ecosystem, letting them either undercut competition prices or maximize software revenue—and that’s before we mention the search data clout. Though Samsung offers Galaxy Store, it’s far from the go-to store for Android users.
To use Google’s Android, companies need to make Google’s suite the default. While switching is easy enough, transforming a Samsung into a “Microsoft Galaxy,” you need to manually switch to apps like Edge and Microsoft Launcher—not something most people bother with.
The DOJ’s “behavioral remedies” mainly target search dominance, echoing a former ruling affecting the Google Play Store. Microsoft teased a future Android store—one that’s on ice now as Google challenges the decision. Clearly, Microsoft still has aspirations for mobile; it’s just biding its time.
The core issue with Android devices lies in Google’s game-changing rules. They claim 30% of transactions processed via Google Play and control the core engine. They’ve crafted rules limiting competition—Amazon can’t sell books through its Kindle app, yet Google sells books on Google Play. Microsoft can’t push cloud games via Xbox on Android, even after Google canceled its own cloud gaming.
For apps like Twitch or Spotify, Google’s “default” dominance suffocates growth, filtering hordes of data for ads as you go online.
Google’s cut, licensing, and default app mandates make competition tough. Samsung leads Android phone making but Apple trumps it in profitability, escaping Google’s toll. For new or niche players like Microsoft, breaking in takes substantial investment or genius innovation. A more open Android could be a game changer for concepts like a Surface Phone, one where default Microsoft apps could thrive, selling Xbox cloud games and integrating Windows services freely—all anathema under Google’s current rules.
Ultimately, perhaps it’s a pipe dream.
If the DOJ’s intent doesn’t promote competition, it may sound the call to separate Android. This theoretical opening could hand Microsoft the last chance to carve a piece of the smartphone pie, planting its products in people’s hands rather than just at desks. It could introduce more people to innovations like Microsoft Copilot and offer a strong base for services like Microsoft Edge, Bing, and Xbox gaming.
Despite open Android speculation (and it feels like a long shot), the narrative features formidable roadblocks. Microsoft’s hardware hero Panos Panay has departed, likely driven by the company’s waning hardware ambitions. Surface devices still exist but lack the buzz of their early days. Projects like the Surface Duo 3 were shelved while concepts like the Surface Neo never came to pass.
The Surface Duo, for its part, was a stylish piece fused unsuccessfully with its operating environment. What potential if it had been paired with a dedicated ecosystem of Microsoft apps, perhaps even debuting a Microsoft-centric marketplace that offers better returns for developers than Google’s model?
This idealized tech realm paints an Android perfectly suited for rollouts of practical innovations and mobile-ready AI ideally positioned for daily tasks in one’s pocket—not tethered to a desktop. It feels improbable, primarily blocked by Google’s restraining influence on Android. Entertaining a crack in Google’s armor through regulatory enforcement is tantalizing—however, planning for political shifts and whims indicates this vision might dwell in the la-la land of “what could have been.”
While we face policy transformations, this musing on Surface Phone dreams likely stays in the realm of fan fiction—a dialogue for what might have soared. And there’s still a mountain of skepticism over trust after past misfires, but isn’t it fun to imagine?
I’m keen to hear your thoughts. Drop a comment and let’s discuss.
