AOL Instant Messenger is dead, and there is a new debate as to whether interoperability killed it. The answer is almost certainly no, but that doesn’t necessarily mean interoperability is a bad thing…or is it?
A comment on Twitter 280, and a correction on Uber in London. Then, why blogs are better than books (in some cases), and a whole list of aggregators not covered in Defining Aggregators.
Tencent’s earnings were good, but as opaque as always. Still, there are insights to be gleaned about advertising in particular, and what that says about Messenger and WhatsApp.
Apple was never in a position to respond to WeChat, just as Microsoft couldn’t respond to Google. Then, Chromebooks win in education for more reasons than cost.
Apple had mixed earnings: most of the world was great, but China was bad again. The reason is that in China WeChat matters more than iOS.
The New York Times has a story about Uber and Apple that had a fundamental flaw and lacked context; then, Apple won this round against Tencent, but this is a battle to watch
The conventional wisdom is that AWS is a commodity, but that only makes sense in the context of the old world. Then, Google tries to catch up to Facebook which tries to catch up to WeChat which is leaping ahead.
Some follow-up on Snapchat, where it fits alongside Facebook Messenger and iMessage, then a discussion of where all the “bot” talk is coming from. Then, Microsoft jumped all in on bots: what does it mean, and what should they do next.
More on Slack’s platform opportunity, which can be compared to what WeChat has already accomplished in China. That said, the fact way that China is truly mobile-first means that it’s likely that no one — including Facebook Messenger — will fully imitate WeChat’s model.
Didi Kuaidi, Ola, GrabTaxi, and Lyft are teaming up against Uber. Most are focused on Lyft, but they’re the least interesting part of this deal. Meanwhile, why is anyone surprised that Tencent would compete “unfairly”, plus, Tiger Capital hedges its bets.