I think this is a very apt analysis, The winning strategy will be making the OS a hardware independent commodity. It's Windows vs. Apple all over again. The thing that positions Google so well is that their revenue stream is not based on selling/licensing the OS. It's based on tying people into their universe of services and then advertising to them. This gives Google a unique position. Microsoft can't do it (or their attemtps at it keep failing--Google just has too big of a head start) and has to license WinMo. Apple won't do it (they want to control the hardware and software). Likewise for Palm and Nokia really. These three all need to sell the device to make money. But it's a huge opening for Sony Ericsson, Motorola, HTC, Acer, Dell, and other not yet existent device manufacturers, on the device side, with Google being the big winner. One problem of course with Android/Google is not just the technical question of it's halfway open, halfway closed OS. The problem is that Google will always be strategizing to suck people further and further into it's universe of services. Of course, there a privacy concerns. But this is also a limitation of choice in and of itself. In the long run, Google could become a monopoly controlling your desktop experience in a way that makes Microsofts attempts at this pale in comparison. I presonally would really rather not have Google suck up the entire world and I try to avoid being part of that. So I really appreciate Nokia making Maemo so open (but I also worry it will always remain a niche product).