If you think that there's enough demand for such a device to justify the expense in developing it, you should have no problems attracting investment to build it, don't you think?
Unfortunately iOS and Android have incredible lock in in addition to more than a decade head start. Just like Oracle is able to continue making $40 billion a year even though their product is ass.
That can be rephrased as "Oracle is continuing to see a return on its investment and innovation in RDBMS from the 80's into the 2000s". Why is this a bad thing?
No, I'm sayin that even though it's not a monopoly, but a duopoly, they should be regulated as a monopoly, because there are no real alternatives, and the barrier to entry is really high.
That depends on how you define the term. If you're suggesting things are less than optimal, I'm perfectly glad to agree with you. If you're suggesting we should use the force of regulation to attempt to optimize them, you've lost me.
