In previous eras, like PC and Mobile, there was only one core technology for operating systems to harness. In contrast, IoT is only a convenient blanket term that actually includes many different vertical markets (e.g. enterprise, consumer, wearables, gateway, healthcare, transportation, etc.), and encompasses a myriad of different devices, user experiences, and input methods. Microsoft/Windows dominated horizontally when there were only PCs, and was able to insist on one experience no matter the hardware; but IoT platforms face a multitude of user experiences. Instead of a single platform achieving dominance in IoT, it could take multiple platforms to reach those needs.
Underlying Market Dynamics
Additionally, IoT’s underlying market dynamics differ from those of the PC/Windows era. The market fit and network effects that led to Windows’ dominance at the time no longer carry over or accrue to IoT platforms in the same way. PCs/Windows achieved dominance based upon securing sales and distribution relationships with enterprise customers, but the internet has since opened up new customers (by reaching large groups of individual consumers). These new consumer markets reward companies very differently from enterprise markets, rewarding them instead based upon the quality of the user experience.
The PC/Windows market primarily began as an enterprise market, meaning that those in charge of purchasing decisions were not always the primary users, and that the quality of the user experience was not often the highest priority in those decisions. Rather, the enterprise market wanted open, generic commodities in bulk, and rewarded companies with the greatest product fit and the strongest distribution relationships. This happened to be Microsoft.
In contrast, neither mobile nor IoT have had one single dominant OS emerge yet. With the new consumer markets opened up by the internet giants, it is now crucial to deliver superior user experiences to attract users, rather than to just control sales, distribution, and access to enterprise customers. Given these new ground rules, OS wars are currently at an equilibrium (e.g. iOS vs. Android), and there will likely continue to be multiple winners in IoT (e.g. Homekit, Brillo, IoTivity, AllJoyn) as well.
The Powers that Be in IoT
IoT is composed of various consumer and enterprise markets. On the consumer side, Google and Apple will continue fighting into the IoT era, one that is nearly as large as both previous eras combined (~4 billion PCs/smartphones vs. ~5 billion IoT devices in 2015). Google and Apple have already acquired the biggest developer and user platforms and are well-positioned to control the home vertical.
Google's Brillo/Weave is an open system that may unite a universe of differing devices, varying inputs, constraints, and uses. A customizable and interoperable platform, where information is aggregated in an intelligent hub, and combined with a conditional rule-set that is dependent upon a user's needs would be powerful. On the other hand, Apple/HomeKit's vertical integration and possession of one the most powerful iOT gateways, the iPhone, will help it to keep delivering a complete, albeit closed, user experience. Apple's integrated approach towards software, hardware, and design thinking--designing wearables and IoT devices from the ground up, rather than based upon physical interfaces--will also help it to continue capturing high-end users.
Other companies (e.g. Intel’s IoTivity, Qualcomm’s AllJoyn, etc.) that might understand IoT very well, but haven’t aggregated users like Apple and Google have, could yet still succeed by going into enterprise vertical markets, or industrial application spheres.
