Why Apple keeps iMessage locked to a single platform in a cross-platform messaging world
iMessage is Apple's text and media messaging service, bundled into the Messages app on iPhone, iPad, and Mac. And that's where the platform support ends. There's no iMessage for Android or for Windows. There's certainly no iMessage for Windows Phone or BlackBerry. Unlike Apple's Mail, Contacts, Calendar, and iWork, there's not even an iMessage in the iCloud. But, on the heels of Facebook buying WhatsApp for $16 billion and BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) being far too late to the cross-platform party... should there be?
If our friends, colleagues, and family all use Apple devices, a few glitches aside, iMessage is close to a perfect solution. If our friends, colleagues, and family aren't all in the Apple ecosystem then iMessage falls back on SMS/MMS. Not everyone wants to use — or pay for — carrier text and multimedia messaging service, however, so that's where cross-platform IM like WhatsApp, Viber, Facebook Messenger, Line, WeChat, and others come in.
If Apple released iMessage for Android — and perhaps others platforms, including the web — then iOS users could both stay in Messages.app, and stay connected to their cross-platform contacts. Apple could also potentially gain a messaging user base as big as WhatsApp, Line, or the other giant services. So why haven't they?
BlackBerry was once in a similar situation. Evolving from the pager they grew to support email first, then BBM. By 2006 they were an incredibly popular handset manufacturer with an incredibly popular messaging service attached to their platform. And those two things, their handset popularity and their messaging popularity, were inextricably linked.
By 2010, however BlackBerry's handsets had fallen behind iPhone and Android. There was talk of BlackBerry taking BBM cross-platform but nothing ever came of it. They were seemingly afraid that if they let their messaging system go, their users would go with it. It wasn't apparent to them at all that their messaging business could surpass their handset business. That BlackBerry as a company could be valued at around $5 billion and WhatsApp, a cross-platform clone of BBM, would one day go for $16 billion. So BlackBerry waited. They waited until many of their users had moved on and only then did they take BBM cross-platform. And instead of a position of strength and dominance, they find themselves fighting to survive.
Could Apple face a similar problem? Could keeping iMessage restricted to iOS hurt them the same way failing to make BBM cross-platform earlier enough hurt BlackBerry?
Apple doesn't mistake their products for their business. Instead of protecting the iPod and the Mac, they pushed ahead with iPhone and iPad. Now, as digital music sales have tanked and PC sales have slowed, Apple is more successful than ever. That's because Apple's business was never iPods and Macs, it was personal computing devices. They try very, very hard to obsolete themselves before someone else can obsolete them.
Facebook has proven themselves to be similar. Facebook's business isn't Facebook. It's attention. Facebook is just a product. Rather than obsoleting themselves the way Apple does, however, they buy companies that appear to be on a path towards obsoleting them. Hence Instagram and now WhatsApp. Facebook doesn't care about people using Instagram or WhatsApp instead of Facebook any more than Apple cares about someone using an iPhone or iPad instead of an iPod or Mac. They just care that they're using Facebook products.
BlackBerry, on the other hand, thought handsets were their business and they were wrong. Handsets were just their product. Attention was their business as well. Namely the attention their phenomenal communication experience gave them. Security, physical keyboards, blinking notification lights, and the handsets themselves only contributed to the delivery of those communications to get and keep that attention, be it pages and email in the early days or BBM after it was developed.
Apple isn't in the attention business. Apple is not the compelling scene through the window. Apple is the window. Apple doesn't much care what scene you're looking at through the window, as long as it's Apple's window you're looking through. And that's a very different dynamic.
To stay successful, BlackBerry had to make sure they kept their users' attention. Facebook likewise. Apple does not. To stay successful Apple has to make sure the devices through which people give their attention have Apple logos on them, regardless of where that attention is going.
Part of doing that is ensuring that iPhones and iPads provide a base-level of functionality right out of the box. The other part is making sure the iPhone and iPad remain the absolute best gateway to the internet and to apps beyond what they come with in the box.
iMessage is there to make sure anyone with an iPhone or iPad can easily keep in contact with the people they care about. Phenomenal HTML5 support and killer Cocoa frameworks are there to make sure any developer can easily and delightfully launch any other messaging app imaginable on the App Store. Which is exactly what they've done.
Apple has traditionally been a far better hardware and software company than they've been a services company. Not only wouldn't cross-platform iMessage play to their strengths, it would further burden their resources.
As much as you or I or many other people might like iMessage to go cross-platform, to be able to use Messages.app to chat with our Android and Windows and other friends, colleagues, and family, to use it on any device or on the web, Apple doesn't need it to. 1) Because iMessage's only major reason for being is to increase the overall value of Apple's actual business: personal computing devices, and 2) because every other service has gone cross-platform for iPhone and iPad, often first and best. Not only isn't that a problem for Apple, it's a key reason for their success.