Should Microsoft Launch the Legendary “Surface Phone” if the DOJ Compels Google to Open Up Android?

Windows Phone has faded into oblivion, and that’s no secret. We’ve all come to terms with the mobile world’s shift to focus on iOS and Android, the two giants shaping our digital era.

In the U.S., Apple’s reign continues, putting a firm stamp on the mobile industry. Yet, when you look beyond the horizon, the global scenario shows a different face. Android, Google’s creation, leads the pack internationally. It’s everywhere because any smartphone maker can use the Android platform. In contrast, iOS, exclusive to Apple’s iPhones, doesn’t come cheap, giving Android a significant edge, especially in smaller markets. Across Europe and parts of Asia, Android smartphones are immensely popular, with Samsung often leading the charge outside the U.S. But Samsung isn’t alone in the race; companies like Huawei and Oppo from China are making waves, offering robust, competitive alternatives.

Amidst all this, Microsoft seems like a ghost, barely visible in the mobile market. Apart from a few frail attempts with Android apps, they appear to have surrendered in the smartphone battle. It’s been ages since the Microsoft Launcher app saw any substantial updates, barring the occasional minor integration, while persistent bugs plague Samsung devices without resolution. Once a favorite, SwiftKey faces neglect too, and the Surface Duo 2, Microsoft’s venture into foldable phones, no longer receives current Android updates, posing potential security risks.

Being nearly absent in mobile could spell substantial trouble for Microsoft. Yes, they have their stake in OpenAI, which could offer lasting returns without much maneuvering, but the decision to walk away from mobile computing has left the doors open for competitors. Now, others like OpenAI, Apple, and Google are steering the future course of consumer AI. Additionally, Microsoft finds itself blocked from pushing forward its “Xbox everywhere” strategy by Apple and Google’s restrictions on Xbox Cloud Gaming.

RELATED: Reflecting on the impact of Microsoft’s Windows Phone shutdown

In hindsight, it’s easy to see the missteps. CEO Satya Nadella himself admitted that ending Windows Phone was a hasty move. Without a stake in mobile, Microsoft lacks the leverage to influence competitors in shaping upcoming innovations in mobile gaming, consumer AI, or any tech aimed at consumers. Not being the “default” option on countless devices worldwide restricts how they reach users. But is there a beacon of hope on the horizon?

Enter the realm of speculative thoughts, if you will.

🔥The hottest Black Friday deals🔥

Can Microsoft’s resurgence in the phone market be sparked by changes from the Department of Justice (DOJ)? Maybe…

The DOJ is considering actions to dismantle some of Google’s monopolistic strongholds, echoing what Microsoft faced in the 90s with Internet Explorer. Those of us who were around then might recall when Microsoft was forced to offer alternative browsers to Windows users, permanently altering Internet Explorer’s dominance and reducing MSN’s (now Bing’s) relevance as a search engine.

With Google Search and Chrome reigning supreme, Microsoft struggled to gather the necessary data to compete in search algorithms. Now, the U.S. government realizes that allowing Google to dominate web browsing and search engines might have been a misstep. They’ve accused Google of pushing its products by manipulating its ad and search monopoly, and the DOJ seeks solutions to foster competition.

Google challenges this ruling, but the DOJ suggests that Google should share its search data with rivals, stop paying to be the default search engine on devices like iPhone’s Safari, and maybe even part ways with Chrome. Whether these moves would foster genuine competition remains debatable. Forcing reliance on Google’s data might just consolidate its control. Currently, Google commands around 90% of the search market, with Microsoft’s Bing trailing far behind at about 5%. But let’s not lose track; search isn’t our main focus.

Not having the “default” status on devices hinders Microsoft’s ability to put its best foot forward. Recent debates have revolved around Microsoft “forcing” Edge as the default browser in Windows 11. Letting Google monopolize the web isn’t a solution either. And honestly, Microsoft Edge is quite a contender these days.

This issue with Google is not merely about criticism; it’s about valid competition. People choose Chrome and Google because they’re top-of-the-line. The real problem lies in the lack of chances for other products to mature and present new possibilities. This is reminiscent of when Microsoft had to relinquish Internet Explorer’s grip as it was stifling innovation. Google could similarly be bottlenecking the web—erasing businesses with abrupt, unexplained algorithm changes. Who’s to say there aren’t better ways to do search out there? We’d never know as companies can’t gather data to test new global search models. Bing, for instance, handles straightforward searches well but falters with the intricate, specific, or local ones.

If Google were compelled to level the playing field, Microsoft might grasp the slimmest chance to not only compete in search but maybe venture back into mobile hardware. Google’s profit from Android largely hinges on user data culled through Chrome and Google Play. The DOJ at one point even contemplated forcing Google to sell Android itself.

What if Android became truly open?

Google’s Pixel line continues to grow, while still trailing the likes of Samsung. Google has an advantage: Google Play Store revenue helps sustain its hardware, allowing Pixel phones either to be more affordable or profit more from software sales, thanks to its (allegedly) monopolistic control over search data. Samsung also runs the Galaxy Store, but it’s neither the default app store nor widely used.

Manufacturers using Android have to package Google’s apps as default. It’s changeable, and you can effectively transform a Samsung into a Microsoft device, by using Microsoft Edge, Launcher, Authenticator, etc. But let’s be real, the majority of users won’t bother.

DOJ’s planned “behavioral remedies” may mainly target search, but the Android ecosystem faced similar allegations over the Google Play Store. Microsoft had started work on its own Android app/game store due to a court ruling, only for progress to stall as Google appealed. Microsoft clearly aims to seize the mobile opportunity; they’re just biding their time.

Building devices with Google’s Android framework comes with its own set of challenges. Google claims a third of every transaction on Google Play, and the default app status grants them a big advantage in developer engagement. Some restrictions border on anticompetitive—take Amazon, which can’t sell books through Kindle’s Google Play app, while Google Books faces no such hurdle. Similarly, Microsoft can’t sell cloud games via the Xbox app, though Google’s no longer existent cloud service enjoyed a free run.

Apps like Twitch and Spotify face similar restrictions due to Google’s stronghold on Android. This clout extends to data management, helping Google tailor ads as users browse.

Google Play’s fees, the licensing nature of Android, and default settings make Android manufacturing a tight arena, impacting most companies. Samsung might lead the Android brigade, but their smartphone profits pale next to Apple’s, burdened by the cut owed to Google. For smaller ventures like OnePlus or Microsoft newcomers, the odds seem insurmountable without hefty investments or groundbreaking innovations. A freer Android platform could bolster the viability of a “Surface Phone” where Microsoft might set its apps as default, sell Xbox games directly, and perhaps incorporate Windows 365 by default. Google’s sway makes this latter scenario unreachable. Creating their own system is off the table too as the app gap is too vast at this point, marking Android as Microsoft’s sole practical gateway back into mobile.

Alas, ’tis but a dream

The DOJ reserves the right to push for Android’s open access if Chrome’s spin-off and data sharing fail to enhance competition. Such shifts could offer Microsoft a fleeting opening to stamp its mark on mobile, becoming the go-to for delivering its array of apps and services. It might also be crucial for introducing Copilot, appealing as a mobile assistant, allowing Microsoft achievement in not just desktops but pocket-friendly solutions. Yet, even if regulators unshackle Android, this scenario remains improbably distant.

Microsoft’s beloved hardware visionary Panos Panay has departed, seeking fertile pastures, while Microsoft’s enthusiasm for a standalone hardware suite wanes. They still produce Surface devices but with less zeal than a few years back. Projects like Surface Duo 3 or the non-starter Surface Neo tablet have fizzled out.

The Surface Duo, with its sleek design, was mismatched with the software it operated on. But imagine a traditional phone, optimized for Microsoft tools, operated via a Microsoft-centric Android store offering better deals than Google? An avenue for Microsoft to trial creative AI applications—things you can fit in your pocket, rather than stare at on your desk? Desktop-bound Copilot seems limited when mobile phones open more avenues for daily integration. Yet, Android as Google envisions it leaves Microsoft (or anyone, honestly) with minimal room for maneuvering a fresh smartphone launch—unless unlocked by regulatory reform in the U.S.

However, in the face of electoral changes and shifting directives, this whole discussion might simply be a retrospective on the “Surface Phone” that never was. Overlooking other hurdles, notably public trust after countless disappointments, dreaming remains indulgent leisure.

What are your thoughts? Drop a comment and let’s start a conversation.