Originally Posted by murraypaul
But the low-end has never had an Apple monopoly, as Apple has never had a low-end phone, so what has changed there?
What has changed is the loss of the near-monopoly at the high-end.
Apple was trying to keep the entire market as a high end monopoly. You paid Apple's price or you didn't get a good smart phone. That's why all the lawsuits. They were trying to protect a monopoly that had been maximized for profit. They have failed world-wide, even their US patent that was the major portion of their Samsung lawsuit has been reviewed and found invalid.
Android offers a effective choice. It is not a Samsung monopoly, other players can use the base Android. If they don't sell as well individually, the entire grouping matters, vis-a-vie the Apple ecosphere. They still lead to consumers getting smart phones that aren't iOS...
(Think of the computer world of the 1980's. IBM PC ruled, but they had cheaper clones running Microsoft OS'es. People might replace a clone with an IBM PC, and keep their software and UI, but they (mostly) wouldn't go and convert to a Mac OS, even if it was better
, because of 1. cost (Apple didn't allow clones and charge high prices, even relative to PCs, 2. Lack of specialised software, and 3. having to learn the new interface...)