Notes on using the iPad Pro for “real work”

<tl;dr>
The iPad Pro is a capable machine for getting all kinds of “real work” done while on the go.

After much deliberation, I bought myself a new iPad Pro 9.7″ about four weeks ago, and since then I’ve been running an experiment to see if I could use my iPad for “real work”. Inspired somewhat by Steven Sinofsky’s treatise on why his iPad Pro has stickers, I wanted to see if I could leave my MacBook at my desk all the time, and only take my iPad with me when I’m on the move (in meetings, working remotely, etc).

My MacBook has been chained to my desk for three weeks now, and since then I’ve written blog posts (like this one), worked on spreadsheets, taken handwritten notes, read and responded to email, set up meetings and managed my calendar, presented with slides at meetings and taken notes, joined video conferences, made drawings, including a few lessons from a “learn to draw” course, surfed the web, read and marked up eBooks, written Python code, played games, watched Netflix, Amazon Prime Video and the European Championship, booked flights, ordered groceries, bought clothes on Zalando and bought other stuff on Amazon: all from my iPad. It is truly the most versatile computing device I have ever used.

The iPad is a capable machine for doing "Real Work" on the go.

The iPad is a capable machine for doing “Real Work” on the go.

In many ways, all of the things you wanted to do with your first iPad, but couldn’t, are now possible. The hardware is faster, lighter and better, for sure, but the biggest improvement is the software, both iOS and third party apps. Thanks to iOS extensions and multi-tasking, apps work together better than they ever did before. Persistent cloud services are baked into everything, so data and preferences are immediately synchronised across all your devices and available everywhere. Microsoft’s Office suite is now thoughtfully designed for iOS and they plug into OneDrive perfectly, and meanwhile Dropbox, which I use for personal files, is integrated into all other apps that I use so I can get files in and out of other apps easily.

I had an iPad 1 when they first came out in 2010, and I bought an iPad Mini Retina a few years ago. Neither of these devices found a way into my regular work routine. Neither was in any way capable of replacing my MacBook for anything other than web browsing, and with an iPhone in my pocket there was little upside to offset the added weight and hassle of carrying the thing around, so I couldn’t find a way to build them into my workflow in a meaningful way. There were too many reasons doing Task X on my MacBook or Task Y on my iPhone was just easier. The iPad 1 was quickly relegated to the coffee table by the couch for occasional web surfing, and nothing else, and my daughter appropriated the iPad Mini as a Netflix device. Now, however, with the iPad Pro I can safely leave my MacBook on my desk for the most part, and use the iPad in all the scenarios when I want to be mobile.

There are plenty of ‘real work’ tasks that I could easily get done on the iPad Pro while away from my desk. Here are some observations:

  • Reviewing a document or set of PowerPoint slides by scribbling on it directly with the Pencil is lovely: it’s so much quicker and more intuitive than typing everything with comments: you can quickly highlight stuff, draw arrows to indicate changes, and add quick comments in the margins. But if you want to edit a longer passage, the keyboard is right there when you need it. (One of the guys in my team told me he’s had term papers come back cleaner. 😉)
  • With a HDMI dongle, presenting with the iPad is easy – and it’s even easier when you’re presenting to a TV with Apple TV/AirPlay.
  • No fussy display settings to worry about: mirroring worked first time, every time for me.
  • The PowerPoint app does a great job of presenting. You can add mark-up to your slides in real time with the pencil (that are automatically discarded when you close the presentation), and it also has a little ‘laser pointer’ feature, where you can point to something by holding on the slide preview.
  • It’s a bit harder to take notes while presenting, though, because the iPad won’t let you have a different app running on the device while presenting, but you can take notes either as annotations directly on the slide, or in the slide ‘notes’ field.
  • Excel works just fine, and you can view complicated sheets and update them easily. I must admit I miss my large dual-monitor setup for working with large and complicated sheets, but I was surprised how capable the iPad version of Excel is.
  • Long-form typing is easy when you attach a Bluetooth keyboard. I’m using the Bluetooth keyboard from my MacBook, and it works just fine.
  • Using the Apple Pencil to take handwritten notes is also great. I used to carry around a slightly larger than A5 Moleskine notebook for taking notes, scribbling drawings, etc, and I would scan in the important ones to Evernote. The iPad and Pencil combination has completely replaced that for me, with my handwritten notes going straight into Evernote, which saves me an extra step of scanning, and saves me carrying around an extra heavy notebook and pens.
  • Having all your files in the cloud makes working life on the iPad possible. I always have access to everything I need, without having to think about it.
  • I’m using Outlook for email, and the way PowerPoint and Excel are built in make it simple and seamless to open documents, review them, and quickly send back your comments.
  • All the apps I use in my normal workflow on the Mac are available and optimised for iPad: Outlook, PowerPoint, Excel, Evernote, Wunderlist, Pocket, Dropbox, OneDrive, Skype, Slack and of course Safari. (Sadly however the Twitter app on Mac is even more crappy than it is on iPhone.) I didn’t have to swap to any new apps or re-learn any behaviour. It’s all there, with all my files, context and history.
  • The iPad also works as a great accessory for the MacBook when you’re at your desk. With apps like Duet you can use it as an extended screen, or Astropad can turn it into a Wacom-like tablet. You can quickly scribble down ideas like in a paper notebook and have them appear immediately on your Mac.
The iPad is really versatile - and great for ebooks.

The iPad is really versatile – and great for ebooks.

Where I did miss my MacBook:

  • My dual-monitor setup. There’s no denying that for some work, like working with big excel sheets, illustrations or presentations, the size of a large monitor, and the accuracy of a mouse matters a lot.
  • Split-screen multi-tasking on the iPad is good, but it is definitely not as quick and seamless as on the Mac to work with multiple documents and apps simultaneously. The iPad also lacks completely the ability to view two different documents of the same type next to each other: for example, two PowerPoint documents, two Word documents, etc. It will be great to see Apple open up the multi-tasking to allow single apps to run multiple instances of themselves in different windows.
  • In terms of apps, the only apps I absolutely cannot use on my iPad are Photoshop and Illustrator, which I use quite often for designing screen mock-ups or for building visuals for presentations. There are alternatives designed for the iPad, but I haven’t found one that completely convinces me yet.
  • Some apps don’t support rich text editing, such as the Outlook app, which is a pain. It’s annoying to always have to send emails in plain text.
  • I can’t say that I found using the iPad in “laptop mode” ergonomically superior to using a laptop with a trackpad or mouse. In fact, I found raising my arm and reaching across the keyboard to the screen to touch some screen element with my finger tiring after a while.

You can get an incredible amount of work done on an iPad. If I ever did find myself frustrated that I couldn’t do something on the iPad, most times it turned out that I could do it; I just needed to do it in a different way.

When you spend a few days using the iPad for everything, you come to appreciate how versatile it really is. One minute you’re typing up a report or an email, then you’re reviewing and annotating a document with the Pencil. After that, you might sit back and browse the web, look at your photos, and then open up the Kindle app and continue reading your book – all from the one device. I would argue that no other device has come anywhere this close to being truly one device for everything.

I'm clearly never going to be an artist, but yes, I drew this, and it's quite impressive what even a layman can achieve drawing on the iPad Pro with the Apple Pencil

I’m clearly never going to be an artist, but it’s quite impressive what even a layman can achieve drawing on the iPad Pro with the Apple Pencil

Tim Cook likes to say that the iPad is “the clearest expression of vision of the future of personal computing.”
They’re not there yet… But I can clearly imagine a future where personal computing is truly versatile, portable and intimate, and in my view the iPad Pro is the clearest version of that yet.

Steve Jobs famously said at the launch of the iPad that having a touch screen on a laptop would be "ergonomically terrible".

Steve Jobs famously said at the launch of the iPad that having a touch screen on a laptop would be “ergonomically terrible”.

Ways to think about Android Instant Apps, and what it means for developers

This week their annual developer event Google casually announced a huge new feature coming soon to Android: Instant Apps. Chris Maddern called it their “one more thing” moment. When finally released, perhaps later this year, it could be the one of the most fundamental changes to the way mobile apps work since the App Store. What it won’t be, however, is an instant solution to the majority of app developer’s main problem: app discovery.

Let’s unpack this a bit.

Android Instant Apps, as they were presented during the keynote, will allow Android native apps to run immediately, without being installed, by essentially lazy-loading the relevant modules to the device at run-time. This will allow users to interact with your app and your content immediately, without needing to go through the hurdle of visiting the app store. Users can then (presumably) install the ‘full’ app if they want to.

It’s easy to see why this is a big deal. The mechanics of installing an app involve a lot of physical and psychological friction: do I really want this app on my phone? Do I trust it? Will I ever use it again? Do I have the time to wait for it to download and install? Do I even have the space for it? (Anyone with a 16GB iPhone can attest to this being a very real and very constant problem). Apps could lose anywhere between 20 to 80% of the traffic that hits their app store page, so anything that helps eliminate this friction will be a huge win for app developers.

Then it gets even more interesting with Android Pay. According to the keynote, Instant Apps will be able to integrate with Android Pay. If we assume this gives the app instant access not just to payment details, but identity and shipping details as well, you could easily imagine purchasing something you just discovered on the web in an Instant App with just a couple of taps.

Ways Instant Apps will help app developers

App linking will be smoother and involve less friction.
Both Android and iOS have allowed native app deep linking for a couple of OS versions now, allowing developers to link into deep content views within other apps. This generally works great if the user has the target app already installed on their device; but if they don’t, the experience isn’t so great: the user is generally redirected either to a mobile-optimised version of the target product, and usually presented with a mobile app upsell ad; or they are directed straight to the app store, where the user needs to first figure out what kind of app this is, do I care enough about it to install it, etc.

Flowchart showing how apps are installed from app links

The sloppy app-install experience from app links

Some companies have been trying to improve this process, such as Branch.io who have built tools to allow developers to use ‘deferred deep links’, so that when the user does install the app after tapping a deep link they will be directed straight to the piece of content they were looking for directly after the install. But there is still heaps that can go wrong: the user needs to tap ‘install’, wait for the installation to finish, then open the app… So although deferred deep links help, they are a band-aid on an essentially sloppy user experience.

Instant apps will solve this by skipping the whole store and to-install-or-not-to-install question. Because of this, I expect to see more developers engaging in app linking partnerships and leveraging such partnerships both to monetise their own users and also to grow by seeking partners to send incoming links. The NYC-based startup Button is building an exciting business around facilitating a network of deep-link-based affiliate partnerships, and through their SDK has also tried to solve parts of the app-install problem by bringing more content into the publishing app.

Allowing easy access to rich native experiences from real world locations
Lots of brands and stores have apps already, but they all suffer from the app install friction as described above. It might be really handy to be able to place your McDonalds order in advance from the McDonalds app, but if you’re only going to McDonalds this one time, will you bother downloading the app, signing up, adding your payment details, etc?

Instant Apps would allow businesses like McDonalds to allow customers to place their order, and pay for it, quickly and easily without needing to download anything. The example Google used in their keynote was paying for parking, without needing to install any app, and – more importantly – without even needing to know which app you need. Just ‘point your phone’ at the parking meter and via the NFC connection it can figure out what app you need, lazy-load in the needed module, connect to Android Pay and – boom! You’ve paid for your parking safely and securely. Or perhaps you’re in a new city and you want to buy a ticket for the subway, but you have no idea how the system works in that city (and we’ve all been there). Just point your phone at the ticket machine, and the appropriate experience to book and pay for your ticket pops up right on your phone.

Given the ease of linking into rich experiences that this allows, I could imagine other, non-commerce use cases. Imagine Yelp issues all of its businesses a QR code. Then when you’re sitting in a restaurant and you’ve had a great meal, you could scan the code and go directly into a Yelp-powered experience where you can leave a review – without needing the Yelp app ‘installed’ on your phone. (And if Instant Apps allow users to access users’ identity, you don’t even need to create an account on Yelp either).

Preview an app without installing it
It will be interesting to see if Google build some of the Instant App mechanism into the Play store directly. This could allow you to quickly ‘preview’ an app before you make the decision to install it. Screenshots, descriptions and videos are great – but nothing beats actually using the app. What if you could preview a working version before you install?

Instant App-powered Trial Versions could become the next frontier of App Store Optimisation.

Or what if this enabled free, limited trials of paid apps? Before choosing to drop $9.99 on that newest distraction-free text editor, what if you could trial it? This could also be great for games: like Shareware for the app economy.

Will you even need a mobile-optimised website at all?
If you take all of this to the logical conclusion, you start to wonder if you need a mobile website at all. (Ok, at least an Android-optimised mobile website, for now).

These days plenty of businesses, such as Hotel Tonight, are mobile-only from day one; but for many others the web, and particularly the mobile web, remains an important discovery and conversion channel. For content-based businesses, it’s particularly important to have a mobile website to deal with the “app not installed” dilemma described above: when somebody discovers your content, either through SEO or a link from another service, you want to be able to show the user some content immediately. (Or you risk sending them directly to the app store and hoping they convert to downloading the app).

If Android Instant Apps can provide a real, native experience immediately, without downloading the app, why would you need to have a mobile website at all? You would shift your SEO focus to concentrating on Google/Firebase App Indexing, and shift your conversion funnel to the Instant App experience.

(There’s an interesting internal conflict for Google here. On one hand, Google is inviting developers to prioritise native app experiences – which when followed to the logical conclusion might very well result in less investment in the web. At the same time, Google’s control and monetisation is still heavily dependent on people searching and discovering stuff on with Google Search: one of their rationales to invest in their Accelerated Mobile Pages project.)

Where Instant Apps won’t necessarily help: App Discovery

Instant Apps could make the entire conversion experience for apps much more seamless, making it easier to access, consume and potentially test/trial apps.

But conversion is only half of the app distribution problem: the second half. The first half of the problem is app discovery, and this is where I don’t see Instant Apps helping that much – at least not directly.

Instant Apps will make it smoother to link between apps, and this could hopefully encourage a stronger ecosystem of app user/value exchange. This will help app discovery for sure. But the majority of apps are still discovered in the ‘traditional’ ways: word of mouth, content search, app store ‘browsing’, or performance/digital marketing.

Instant Apps by and large won’t let developers circumvent the traditional app discovery channels. You still need to get your app in front of a user. What it does is dramatically simplifies the conversion process, allowing more users to interact with your app and discover its value – once they have discovered it.

Things for developers to think about

What does Instant Apps mean for you? Some things to think about:

  • If you have a content or commerce-based business, start thinking about how to expand your reach through affiliate partnership building. Instant Apps will make consuming your content or service via a referred link in a partner app much easier and this can be a powerful source of acquisition.
  • Where else can you include links that could surface deep views of your service without needing an install? In marketing materials? Affiliate programs?
  • Start thinking about how to modularise your codebase now. For some apps it will be easy: Google says that some apps should be able to make the necessary changes within a day. But for other apps, depending on the architecture, it will be more complicated. Try signing up for early access to the program in the Android developer portal. But even if you don’t get in, start thinking now about how you will approach modularisation – is there a big architecture refactor you’ll need to invest in?

Messaging and Chat are the next big channel for Growth

Growth is about finding new channels.

Messaging in general as a channel is young and fresh – and there will be a goldrush very, very soon. Services like Slack and Facebook Messenger are following the lead set by the asian chat successes like Line and WeChat in turning chat into a platform that allows access to services over the top – services like payments, shopping, games and more.

You can now order an Uber by typing a command in Slack, or you can order a pizza within the WeChat app in China.

What happens when chat becomes our interface with the world?

Before the point-and-click windows-based GUI evolved, the earliest PCs running DOS or similar operating systems had a ‘chat-style’ interface – a command line.

Messaging could be the next Operating System, and the starting point could be, once again, the command line. The difference is this time the abstraction level is much, much higher. Instead of a command like cd /uber which would change your working directory to the one called ‘uber’, now a command like /uber ride can literally order you an Uber. What’s old is new again.

There is a big possibility chat will be the next user interface. Chat – or personal assistants – or more likely a combination of both – will replace the apps grid as the next major UI paradigm. The chat window is always open. Yes, you use it to talk to your colleagues or friends – but it is already replacing email, and will piece-by-pice replace everything else around it. It’s so much easier to order an uber by typing “/uber ride” into the chat window that’s already open, than pulling your phone out, unlocking it, opening an app, etc.

(As a fun thought experiment: What comes next? What does the next part of the cycle look like? What does a GUI for chat look like?)

Microsoft: Services Everywhere (not Windows Everywhere)

I came across two interesting pieces of Microsoft news today.

Firstly, Microsoft have bought the company behind a Visual Studio plugin called UnityVS which enables developers using the cross platform game engine, Unity, to write and debug their Unity programs directly within Visual Studio. Unity has support for all the major mobile operating systems, and then some – and Microsoft is slashing the existing $99 price tag and giving it away to developers for free. (Link)

In other words, Microsoft are investing in, and giving away for free, tools to make it easier to port games to a variety of platforms. Instead of reinforcing the old paradigm of “Windows everywhere”, they are literally helping to strengthen competitor platforms like iOS and Android.

The second piece of news was a rumour concerning a possible upcoming wearable device. (Link) Other than the first gasp-moment that it might not have a screen at all, the real news here was the rumour that the device might be compatible with Android and iOS mobile devices. This, compared with the wearable strategies of Android, iOS and Tizen (Samsung) devices, is a revolution. All the competitors mentioned here enforce a strict our-platform-only policy when it comes to their wearable offerings: the Tizen-powered Gear devices only pair with Samsung Galaxy devices, Android Wear only works with recent Android and the rumoured iWatch will of course only work with iOS devices. And here’s Microsoft with a device that could work with anything.

What does it mean? Perhaps it is a recognition of the inevitability of an Android/Apple-dominated smartphone market for the foreseeable future. Maybe it’s a strategy to increase sales: after all, Visual Studio still costs, and it also needs Windows to run; and the sales forecasts of any wearable device that only works with Windows Phone devices could not have been good (a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction). Either way, it’s a far-cry from the Microsoft of the 90’s and 2000’s and “Windows everywhere”, and it’s certainly some more clear signs of the company’s increasing play to become services-first.

Amazon Dash is another great example of un-bundling the smartphone

The newly launched Amazon Dash device (link) is a single-purpose hardware device that allows users to scan the items in their fridge or pantry that they’re running low on, and an order is automatically sent to Amazon’s fresh grocery service.

I find it very interesting because it is representative of how you can now build hardware so cheaply that the advantages of the unique form-factor versus a smartphone app outweigh the marginal cost of purchasing the hardware.

Sure you could do everything Dash does with a smartphone app… but having dedicated hardware makes it easy, and it is cheap (enough).

As the cost of embedded processing, sensors and (in some cases) glass continues to collapse, I predict we’ll see even more smartphone un-bundling into discreet, single-purpose connected hardware devices.

The unbundling of Facebook and the evolution of mobile

Last week Facebook announced the new Paper app – an app that turns your Facebook news feed into your own personal newspaper. At the same time they announced Facebook Creative Labs and promised further small, single-purpose apps.

This is all part of a growing trend from Facebook to un-bundle their core mobile product/service into smaller, focussed single-purpose apps that solve specific problems. The first move here was Facebook Messenger, which was designed to compete head-on with the growing number of successful messaging apps that are growing incredibly in the marketplace (Whatsapp, Line, WeChat, Snapchat, etc).

When the giants of the desktop web era (Facebook, LinkedIn, Yahoo, and so on) moved to mobile, to begin with their service architectures stayed more or less intact. On the web, a single product has a single URL, a single brand and a single interface and structure. Facebook on the web is an entire product service that exists behind the facebook.com URL.

It turns out on mobile, however, that there are different dynamics driving user behaviour and expectations. On mobile, how users interact with apps, and how they choose to create and consume content, is very different than it was on desktop.

The structure of apps and the multi-tasking abilities of modern smartphones makes changing apps really easy. It is nearly always easier and quicker to press the ‘home’ button on your smartphone and open another app than it is to navigate the menu structure within the app you’re already in to access a different function.

This dynamic is driving the un-bundling of Facebook’s offer. Others are following. Yahoo already has offered a variety of mobile products since Marissa Mayer joined as CEO. Others, such as LinkedIn, will surely follow. (LinkedIn experimented with an email application, which they have since pulled. I predict they will release a news reader, similar to Paper, some time soon).

On mobile, users prioritise simplicity and speed over flexibility and broad functionality. Apps have a single use-case or purpose, as opposed to web products, or pre-mobile software in general, which cater for maximal different use-cases and functionality.

This is all a further acknowledgement that the paradigms that drove software and user behaviour in the pre-mobile world don’t fit completely to mobile, and the platforms are still evolving and changing.

Benedict Evans has posited that we really don’t know what it even will mean in 5 years to say “I installed an app on my smartphone”. So very little is settled – which means big opportunities – and also big risk – for mobile players.

Location-Based Services in 2014

I’ve been thinking a lot about the future of location-based services lately. The first thing that occurs to me: nobody talks about location-based services anymore. There are just ‘services’.

It occurs to me that Location, in and of itself, is not an ‘experience’, per se. It is an enabler of experiences. Allow me to explain.

There are two critical aspects that make up a location-based service:

  1. The ability to accurately detect the real-world location of the user (or, more specifically, the user’s device) and communicate this back to a service in real-time.
  2. The ability to accurately place this, and other, locations of interest on a map.

Take a classic “location-based service” such as Foursquare, where users ‘check-in’ to venues, stores or other locations with the app on their smartphone when they visit the store physically. The location of the user is the enabler that allows the check-in to take place, and the rendering of a map of the area is the enabler that allows the check-in to be viewed and consumed later.

Location itself isn’t the point or motivator for the experience. It’s just what makes the experience possible.

Hence the term “location-based service” has fallen a bit out of favour. Location is no longer an exciting differentiator among mobile experiences, and the location is very rarely the real point of the ‘service’. The point is always something else: find out how good a hotel is (TripAdvisor), review a restaurant (Yelp), find a new place for lunch (Foursquare), find deals nearby (Groupon, iBeacon), etc.

So the thing to remember about Location: it’s not an experience. Location is an enabler of experiences.

Mobile strategy in a rapidly evolving industry

Benedict Evans, the well-known mobile industry analyst, has posited that we actually have no idea what it will mean in five years to “install an app on my smartphone”.

The market and the technology that powers it is changing and evolving so fast that there is no way to know how the industry will look in five years time. Will a smartphone still be a rectangular device with a screen that you carry in your pocket? Will it have already been absorbed into an invisible network of embedded, connected, wearable devices? What will be the form factors that define ‘mobile’ in five year’s time? How would you develop experiences for them?

For everyone in the business of creating and distributing mobile experiences, the dependency you have to the mobile ecosystems is the single largest pertinent factor in your strategic profile. How does not having a clear view not the future impact your strategic planning? What will your business model be in five years? What will your business be at all in five years?

It is an interesting lesson in strategy definition to be able to separate the WHAT from the HOW.

The HOW is a constant evolution of the environment you’re operating in. The WHAT is much more constant, and can absorb even large changes in the environment.

The WHY… it could last perhaps forever.

Validation of the freemium model for mobile apps

Here’s an interesting statistic.

The top 20 grossing apps in the iOS App Store are all free apps, according to online app analytics platform Distimo.

In fact, from the top 100 grossing apps, only 9 of them are paid apps, with prices ranging from $0.99 to $8.99, but most hovering around the $2.99 mark.

Top grossing apps on the iOS App Store, 20 November 2013
Source: Distimo.

The Google Play store is similar. There, only three apps in the top 100 grossing apps are paid, with the first paid app coming in at position 33.

Top grossing apps on the iOS App Store, 20 November 2013
Source: Distimo.

The revenue for these free apps seems to be coming predominantly from in app purchases.

It certainly seems to validate the idea of the freemium model, and proves that customers are willing to pay for in-app purchases to upgrade their experiences.

When good enough is… good enough (and the power of convenience and platform lock-in)

The Guardian published a very eye-opening piece yesterday on the usage of the Google Maps app on iOS devices. The summary is: despite the massive consumer backlash when Apple ousted Google and launched Apple Maps in iOS6, and the huge number of downloads the Google Maps iOS app attracted, usage of Google’s app has been falling steadily. It is now estimated that only 6M users used the Google Maps app in September – a loss of 23M users. Meanwhile 35M people used the built-in Apple Maps app.

The lesson here is that consumers are not always willing to sacrifice convenience for a better experience.

If your app or service wants to compete against functionality that’s built into the system, then the experience must not just be better, but must be an order of magnitude better to encourage people to switch. Or, ideally, it needs to be something completely different.

You won’t change default user behaviour and you can’t compete against baked-in functionality. Sure, a portion of power users might go to the effort of using an extra app for certain key tasks – but that won’t be the majority of users.

Think about it: why use a special app for managing your calendar when your phone’s app is good enough?

What else does this tell us?

It tells us that the OS platforms have a clear advantage on engagement for built-in experiences – and that the engagement platforms that can attract usage independently from the OS platforms are those which need to be platform agnostic to work – the best example being messaging apps. Whatsapp would have a fraction of the value if it only ran on iOS. It needs to be on all platforms fulfil the promise to the user.

This is maybe Google’s advantage over Apple. Google is about reach, and is happy to provide services that work on all mobile OS platforms. Apple, on the other hand, is set up to keep their proprietary experiences within the walled garden… which is why there is no (official) iCloud app for Android, but there is are Gmail, Google Drive, Google+ and other Google apps for iOS.

In the mobile value chain, the long(er)-term strategic differentiators will be those built on engagement platforms that cross across the mobile OS platforms. Or, said another way: the apps that will drive large numbers of users will be engagement platforms built around utility that is not, or cannot, be provided by the OS.

Google is trying this with Google+.

So why doesn’t Apple build a messaging service, for example?

Well, they have one – iMessage – but it only works between other iOS devices, and as such will never be a threat to Whatsapp, or indeed Google. A more interesting question is: how long before Apple makes iMessage available as an Android app? Would Apple take on the expense in order to drive further platform engagement and possibly convert a few more Android users?

So far they don’t need to – but as social messaging platforms become distribution channels, they may start to feel the threat.