No, and why should there be? Want an Apple phone? It comes with iOS and a walled garden. Don't want that? Go Samsung / Huawei / HTC / Sony / etc. etc. etc.
There's also a much older conflict at play here, one that goes back to Atari and Nintendo and 80s PC market.
Integrated software / hardware companies versus standalone hardware and software companies.
PC gamers and those who play mostly 3rd party titles tend to have an "open platform" mentality. They espouse all the advantages and we've seen several of those arguments in this thread. It is to the advantage of PC companies and 3rd parties to encourage this mindset. Uniformity across platforms makes it cheaper to produce games, cheaper to produce uniform hardware, and ultimately leads to third party software / hardware manufacturers consolidating power. They usually default to some form of "it's not fair that the big companies have all this power", pulling the same David vs Goliath plea like EPIC is doing now. If third parties gain power, they then leverage their influence to squeeze out the integrated hardware/software brands because they offer a value proposition that cannot be matched. We already see that happening with several publishers who've opened up their own storefronts (Ubi, EA, EPIC) to eat a piece of that pie, and the end result is a splintering market.
Arcade and console gamers tended to have a brand-loyalty and platform-loyalty mindset. Integrated hardware/software companies (like Nintendo, old Atari, and old SEGA) brought computer hardware from the universities and labs into the bars and the bowling alleys. They took over the boardwalks and arcades, completely absorbing the latter term. Consoles were an extension of that philosophy, an integrated hardware/software product that delivered a
branded experience from a name that you trusted, with a suite of features that you wanted. IBM and Commodore operated in an integrated hardware/software model until Microsoft took over the OS field, acting very much like a 3rd party gaming company imposing demands upon the console manufacturers. Unlike with third-party PC manufacturers and third-party publishers, you barely hear a peep about "those poor platform holders" which should be a hint that his is largely a PR / marketing argument. When EA favored SEGA Genesis, that was just competition. When Sony "betrayed" Nintendo with the PS1 and eating up more third parties, that was just competition. When Origin and U-play oopened, that was just competition. They always default back to the "competition" angle without ever applying it to third parties.
This conflict won't go away, but it's interesting to watch it unfold over the decades.
