And it represents 20% of Apple's revenue so pretty sure this "they haven't actually jumped on the services train" comment is just a little off.
Nobody in our household is watching it; it has no app for Android TV.
Worst cast make people pay for some apple services to get iMessage if you really want to. They really are repeating RIM's mistake here.
iMessage would be trusted, largely spam free, etc.
My wife is now on Google Duo because it IS cross platform. WhatsApp and Telegram as well. These messaging networks are natural monopolies. So now I am on Duo etc. I just wish her parents could have installed iMessage on their phones - then apple could have charged us all $5/month for some type of family (10 person) plan.
No, they don't think that. Their refusal to extend iMessage to Android, to not even provide an iMessage API that would allow Google or third-parties to extend iMessage to other platforms has nothing to do with creating the best product. It's coercion, just as I quoted Federighi writing.
Just above that line he wrote "to get users to switch social networks we’d need more than a marginally better app."
Well then, make it insanely better. I happen to disagree with him though. I think he sold Apple short. I think even a marginally better messaging app would be sufficient.
Ultimately what I would like of Apple is for them to provide the best experience on their own devices, but also to provide interoperability with their services for third parties to extend to non-Apple devices.
BTW, it's interesting to see that they are extending to non-Apple hardware with AppleTV+. They've even paid Roku recently to get an AppleTV+ button on the Roku remote.
But iMessage isn't the product, it's a feature of the product. They think by not letting those features be available on other platforms they are creating the best product. You can't make the best product while simultaneously commoditizing your differentiators.