Companies selling physical goods lead to a decent amount of jobs in every country they operate in by definition. Not so for software.
It is US big tech who has for a decade or 2 reaped enormous benefits from extracting large sums of money from non-US economies while contributing near-zero back to those economies (often not just near-zero but straight up deeply negative amounts due to externalities).
Seen from the rest of the world, the has spent the last few decades killing the software and hardware industry of everybody else through practices that feel very much like a combination of a tax on tech and an abuse of monopoly.
If you wonder, the rest of the world doesn't quite see any difference between the "unfair" practices of which US Conservatives accuse China and the practices that the US has adopted for the last 40+ years in a number of domains when it comes to becoming/remaining the dominant player in a number of fields.
Enormous net negative, and I'm lucky enough to be part of the poster child society that shows just how much better the alternative is: South Korea. And even here people still use lots of US tech (Instagram is huge), just much less of it, in every case at massive net benefit to Korean society as a whole.
Instant messaging, online payments, online shopping, second hand market place, domestic hotel bookings, email are all local tech companies. Food delivery was local for very long, now technically acquired by foreign company but run independently as local tech. Taxi apps have been local for very long, though Uber's presence is growing - but even there they got into the market by acquiring a local player and running them relatively independently afaik (less sure about this one). Even then, majority of market share is still non-Uber locals. Anything finance-related is local. Maps are local. Gaming streams was Twitch+Local but is now local only.
Despite Android enjoying >90% market share for 10+ years (now rapidly losing to iOS, I'd say among age 20-30 iOS is >40%), the only Google products that have been popular were Youtube and Chrome. Gmail somewhat.
Even the dating app market here is dominated by local players. This is the only case I can think of where the result is actually worse than if it wasn't, which is quite a feat considering just how awful Tinder and friends are.
The only US apps that dominates its field here is Instagram. Chrome and Youtube do as well but gained that purely through default and PC usage. Netflix and Disney+ are popular by virtue of original content, but sports are local players. Spotify to an extent, but again, nowhere near 90% market share like US or Europe.
For obvious reasons, most tourists and short-term foreigners here hate all of this. But frankly their opinions should be ignored. Despite being a foreigner as well it's clear as day that it's much better for everyone else.
The local replacement of Google maps is the easiest example, I've written a little about it here [1].
China is another country that has developed its own local apps, mainly because many global ones are banned there. Even if Google, Uber, and others had free rein, I don’t think they could compete with the existing options. The local apps are so tuned to Chinese culture, an American app just wouldn't be intuitive to them.
Do you think the local apps, aside from dating, are better than their U.S. counterparts, or is it mainly due to their strong local momentum? Could the Western apps compete in that market? It sounds like Uber is making some inroads.
> Do you think the local apps, aside from dating, are better than their U.S. counterparts, or is it mainly due to their strong local momentum? Could the Western apps compete in that market? It sounds like Uber is making some inroads.
Yes, they're better.
The first reason being what you touched upon with China. To give an example; Meta will almost never consider developing some specific feature or local integration purely for Italy, despite almost everyone in Italy using it. This is an awful situation, really, but it's just because from Meta's perspective it doesn't push the needle [1]. What if instead of Whatsapp all of Italy used ItaliApp? They'd be busy fulltime doing local integrations, things that make sense for Italians. There's nothing else for them to do. They would probably have tried at some point to go abroad, utterly failed, and from then on just focused on the local market. How do you improve revenue from a market, offering a free app like instant messaging, when you already have 99% penetration? Make people use it more. How? Useful features.
Second reason is much less enshittification. Now I think this effect would be less severe for ItaliApp, as part of this is cultural in Korea, but it'd still be there. Given ItaliApp will not turn into a trillion dollar behemoth, if it enshittifies too much, there's more chance of competition popping up. Either local, or the neighboring EspañaApp sensing an opportunity. The Google maps comparison I linked to at the bottom is the best example. US apps can be great - many years ago, Google maps used to be. They just no longer are.
Uber is gaining ground mostly through tourists and short-term expats. The biggest local taxi app took far too long to add foreign credit card support. But like I said, Uber here is still a JV, did not start out as Uber, and I'm fairly sure they still run their ops here much more locally than they do in e.g. European countries. It remains to be seen whether they'll keep on growing, but for now among locals I still put their market share at <20%. I do actually use them for a different reason; unlike the main local app, Uber shows the drivers' rating after they take your call. I haven't met anyone else who cares about this though.
[1] I actually think they're leaving a lot on the table here, but I could be wrong.
If the latter, yes, certainly. My last two employers had to hire US and Canadian developers anyway just to be able to sell to the US/Canada, so I guess it's already the case.
As far as me or my dictionary are concerned, a rubric is a category, or perhaps a chapter. :shrug: