There are a couple of obvious problems with the breadth-first approach. While I think everyone would agree that a great platform beats a bunch of great one-function apps, building a great one-function app is much cheaper and less risky than trying to build a platform. The number of people who know some narrow problem they can solve better than existing solutions is exponentially greater than the number of people who know how to build a broad platform that solves most problems better than existing solutions. And the reality is that most companies who pay for platforms will still buy one-function apps if the platform's functionality is inferior enough to replace that aspect. They are much less likely to buy another entire platform, however.

I doubt Parker actually personally believes what he's saying here, it seems more like marketing from a company that is trying to sell a platform than it does the thoughtful opinion of an individual.

I have worked for companies that chased breadth and companies that focused. The focused group contained the only real successes.

Breadth is a killer. It requires resources (eng, PM, executive) that are not available in young companies. Where it was pursued, the management imperative to build the broad set of capabilities without resourcing meant that almost everything sort of sucked. It was in one instance the result of a strong founder chasing every shiny buzzword even without a strong business justification.

Go with focus, unless you have proven-strong management and actual big-tech resourcing.