For context, I'm a long-time iPhone user, who switched to a Pixel 8a about 18 months ago.

> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.

I can't say I noticed a difference in quality when switching. Maybe some people can, but for me it was just a different, but still well-made phone.

> Apple has higher consumer trust.

I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.

I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.

> Apple has better app selection (for most people).

Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.

As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.

Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience.

I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore. That was maybe true in the very beginning, during the gold rush time of the app store. But not since then. In which category are there better iOS apps? Browsers? No, strictly worse. Youtube app? No, worse. Texting? Worse or equal (Whatsapp). Podcast client? I assume worse, since there is no Antenna Pod. Social media apps? The iOS variants of those apps are afaik in no way better. What else is there, where is the advantage?

Also, while the Play store is an equally ad-riddled and unsearchable hellhole, at least Android does have with F-Droid a high quality alternative. iOS has nothing.

But sure, removing the F-Droid advantage can only hurt Android, the direction of your comment still stands.

I'm similarly baffled for the reasons you state but your breakdown of the market differentiations is a little hyperbolic.

> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years

Apple has never had better hardware (on mobile). Apple has had better software support & integration for their hardware that has lead to e.g. strong camera quality advantages (iOS camera app has been able to use the hardware better to produce photos people want despite some Android OEMs having objectively better camera modules since those OEMs have to work through a lot of Google contracts & software extraction).

The hardware has never been better - their holistic ecosystem has just made integrations with it smoother.

> Apple has better app selection (for most people)

This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.

To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.

One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Outside of the US market the impact of that "every Android user lost to the increasing iOS market share" is significantly diluted (tbh I'm not sure it's even increasing outside of the US at all) & emerging markets are growth areas.

Why the surprise, they do the same with search, they do the same with their Google workspace (the degree to which they are pushing AI is really hurting the product).

Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago, they are so arrogant they think the audience is now fully captive.

  > And Google's strategy is to continue removing differentiating features from Android

personally, it makes me less enthusiastic about android as i don't need another iphone but n=1, so maybe it will work out for them....

> Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder.

If the rumors are true that the whole anti-sideloading thing is mostly because some governments complained, it might not have to do with a business strategy at all.

Apple only implemented USB-C due to pressure from the EU.

One area Android has a clear advantage is Android TV devices verified by Google, because there is a much wider array of streaming apps of all kinds available. However google doesn’t seem to focus on this very much, and if you look for forum recommendations for google android streaming devices it’s very often the NVIDIA shield pro from 2019. Hopefully that device will I’ll be supported for a few more years because there seems to not be good easily available alternatives.

Because antitrust laws are strong in a few countries. While most of the 2nd or 3rd world antitrust laws are non existent. Google's strategy is to squeeze those markets. They have higher population too and hence many more advertising to sell and much more control of the "online experience" in those countries.

What confuses me is that easy "sideloading" has been the main thing that kept down the proliferation of degoogled custom ROMs.

Apple makes a lot more money. Google wants to do what Apple does, to make more money like Apple.

Google might also get paid to enable surveillance.

I have a feeling, despite Google's communications, this is all an attempt to thwart the numerous ad-free YouTube apps.

Another reason it should have been broken apart years ago. It's laughable that the biggest ad company in the world owns the largest video site in the world, largest browser in the world, largest search engine in the world, and largest mobile OS in the world.

Their strategy is growing markets, especially in india, and africa, and of course China. It's where the chinese oem dominate. Beside chinese OEM, i think the only other player is Samsung. So google strategy seems to be to circumvent people from misusing their OS by blocking certain services (mainly ads). This is done via apps from fdroid, and rooting and what not. If google can control how people uses their devices (block vpn based adblocking, or rooting all together), they have better grip on the market. At the end of the day, Android is front for an ad platform.

People who are reaponsible for Android all use Google phones. They dont care about android. They dont use it. They dont understand their use cases.

If you are hired by a manufacturer of say cola, you cannot drink the competition cola.

Those in google laugh when asked to show their phones - and then show iphones. In any other business they would be terminated.

Except only a few countries in the world have wages where their citizens can afford Apple.

While I can afford Apple, out of principle I am not buying anything above 300 euros, that requires me to also buy another computer for hobby coding, and a dev license.

All my use of Apple hardware is via projects where pool devices are assigned to the delivery team.

This is a legitimately crazy take, yes the differentiations are less but how we got there isn’t so altruistic

I’m firmly in the Apple ecosystem and every one of those examples were not Apple’s unilateral decision

I think seeing the noose circling around both Apple and Google’s necks better explains the quagmire that Google is in

Apple was getting ahead of a European consumer protection ruling to switch to a single interoperable cable, USBC was there

Apple and Google worked to make RCS better for years, as Apple was ignoring it and Google was using a non-standard RCS

> Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.

Well no, Chinese phones are above Apple material-wise (better battery, better cameras, better cooling) and on par SoC-wise since last year. That's what makes Google's strategy so baffling.

> Apple has better app selection (for most people).

It's entirely the same. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Android is completely on par app-wise. Apple has the iMessage lock-in in the US obviously but not in the rest of the world. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.

The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.

It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.

I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime.

>>Apple has had better mobile hardware for years

Are you joking? Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now. From batteries to cameras and screens, apple is way behind on hardware tech. Yeah they are better than Samsung - but Samsung has also massively fallen behind what's the state of the art.

>>is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.

Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year? And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model.

Thinking Apple hardware is better is utterly laughable when you look at non-US Android devices.

Much better camera sensors, much better silicon carbon batteries etc in Oppo, Vivo, Honor and Xiaomi devices than anything Apple produces. Form factors Apple still hasn't figured out, such as 7th gen Foldables, Flip foldable phones etc, Camera zoom lenses that can be attached...