In 2013 emails, Eddy Cue pitched iMessage for Android, but Craig Federighi said it would simply “remove an obstacle to iPhone families” buying Android phones
‘Do we want to lose one of the most important apps in a mobile environment to Google?’
The VergeRussell Brandom
Context & Ripple Effects
The newly disclosed exchange gives Apple’s iMessage strategy a clearer internal logic: distribution on Android was weighed against the value of keeping iPhone households from switching. It follows reports that Apple had considered an Android version, including circulated interface mockups, while later internal correspondence described an Android release as likely to hurt Apple more than help it.
The emails also sharpen the lock-in argument raised around Epic’s case. The 2016 Schiller email cited by Epic aligns with Federighi’s earlier concern that cross-platform iMessage would reduce a reason to remain with iPhone.
First-order effects
Epic gains internal Apple language that more directly ties iMessage exclusivity to limiting Android switching, strengthening its characterization of the service as a retention tool.
Apple’s rationale for keeping iMessage off Android becomes less about product availability and more explicitly about protecting iPhone-family purchasing decisions.
Second-order effects
Google’s later claim that Apple’s lack of RCS support holds back messaging for Android and iPhone users gains a more concrete competitive backdrop in Apple’s documented preference for exclusivity.
Messaging interoperability becomes a more pointed competitive issue for Apple because the Android-version decision is now connected in the record to handset switching rather than only app strategy.
Third-order effects
If major messaging services remain tied to device ecosystems, consumer communications tools can continue to function as a durable switching barrier in smartphone competition.
The record points toward a broader contest over whether platform owners can use proprietary messaging networks to differentiate hardware ecosystems while rivals press for interoperability.
The trend: Mobile messaging is increasingly a battleground between proprietary ecosystem retention and cross-platform interoperability.
Eddy Cue wanted to bring iMessage to Android in 2013 https://www.theverge.com/... // This is such a familiar debate. The only surprise is that people still might think this sort of debate would not happen or that one side is obviously correct.
Whoa. Even Beijing had to tell Apple that the App Store review process wasn't up to snuff. This is from an interview with former head of App Review https://twitter.com/...
Apple's defined tracking as Fortnite sharing information with Google so you might see targeted ads for PUBG in search results as “tracking” but seeing ads for PUBG in the App Store because Apple knows you downloaded Fortnite is “not tracking”. Very curious definition of privacy h…
@dcseifert @reckless I had the same thought. This dude is so nice and jovial when being interviewed by press and in the videos. Then you see these statements and it's hard to picture him being a ruthless businessman in private.
Come back around to this - it is objectively funny that Apple execs though Google could execute a messaging strategy back then, but what really happened is that Facebook won messaging globally. https://www.theverge.com/...
Apple believes you should have a choice! Just not about payments. Nor stores. Nor a choice to play Fortnite. Nor a choice for developers to distribute apps directly. Apple thinks those choices should be Apple's alone.
Evidence in the Epic / Apple trial is starting to come out — here, an email exchange between Eddy Cue and Craig Federighi where Cue wanted to bring iMessage to Android in 2013: https://t.co/nqaCpsP5FS https://t.co/TIPdE0dCId