The difference is that the underlying protocols in those android apps are open, and so can be communicated with by any other app that anyone chooses to write an app.
Apples apps are built on top of proprietary protocols which they do not allow anyone else to use, and so there are lots of features and functionality that can only be used by Apple giving them the edge over anybody else.
> and so can be communicated with by any other app that anyone chooses to write an app
...and so, win?
> Apples apps are built on top of proprietary protocols which they do not allow anyone else to use
So Google let's anyone use their APIs but no one does, because developers would rather "win" by writing to more limited APIs that Apple controls and keeps for themselves.
Doesn't make sense to me.
Google's continuity in general, and in Android, is shoddy. Their support across "n" platforms is weak. Compare remote mobile automated QA services for iOS devices vers Android devices. The latter is a nightmare.
Even giving everyone full (but not really, because there are closed and controlled private APIs to Google services, too) access, as you say, can't bring them greater success. Because developers hate open platforms. /s
What they hate is poorly architected, sadly supported and non-revenue generating platforms.
Apples apps are built on top of proprietary protocols which they do not allow anyone else to use, and so there are lots of features and functionality that can only be used by Apple giving them the edge over anybody else.