re: Why Android's Dominance Is Bad
Despite my preference for Apple devices, I'm happy to agree that Macs aren't necessarily better than Windows PCs. Each has its pros & cons.
But Chuck is correct: more market share doesn't necessarily equate to something being "the best."
It's no secret that - just as in the desktop/laptop markets - the are numerous manufacturers of Android devices, whereas only Apple makes iOS devices (by its choice). Those multiple makers represent far more manufacturing capability than Apple has. The multiple vendors also compete not only against Apple, but against each other, which - again, just like in the PC market - has created a race to be the lowest-priced provider. A benefit of that - for Google - is that Android devices are less expensive than iOS devices, and that includes the newer, more state-of-the-art models, whereas Apple only gives away its 4-generations old iPhone 3GS and provides deep discounts on 2- and 3-generation old equipment (4S and 4, respectively). So, customers can get a "newer", more-current Android phone for less - free, even. And for the vast majority of consumers, price is the biggest decider, so they opt for the less expensive/free Android instead of the iPhone. To be sure, some folks - particularly techies - choose Android because they believe it's better, "it's more open" or just because it's not from Apple.
But most consumers simply don't care. They just want a smartphone so they can check email, post on Facebook and surf the web anywhere anytime. And Android offers that for less money.
Chuck's analogy to cars is dead-on, though: People buy more Ford Focuses than BMWs not because the Focus is a better car; they buy the focus because it's less expensive. Some don't care for the BMW's advantages. Some just can't afford them. Either way, Ford sells more Focuses than BMW sells of all of its models combined. But that doesn't make the Focus the better car.
I mentioned BMW specifically, because back in 1997, shortly after returning to Apple, Steve Jobs clearly explained that Apple doesn't define success as making the most popular devices, but by making the best devices possible. Then he compared Apple to BMW. Not everybody wants, needs or can afford a BMW, but for those who do, it's nice to have the choice. (Ftr, I don't care much for BMWs, I'd rather have a Caddy CTS-V ... Wagon. ;-)
Apple is successful enough with its strategy. It doesn't need to be the biggest in my market to be a successful business. Likewise, Android is successful. And I'd argue that we're all better off with both of them in the game ... and maybe Microsoft, too.