Android vs iOS

History

The first Android phone, the T-Mobile G1 (or the HTC Dream in the US) appeared in October 2008; the first iPhone was launched in June 2007. Since then, these operating systems have changed substantially - remember the iPhone didn't support third-party apps to begin with.

We've now on version 6 of Android (Marshmallow) and version 9 of iOS, with new versions due out by the end of the year. Over the course of the last nine years we've seen these platforms become more alike in terms of the features they offer, the way they handle notifications, and the apps they support.

Of course Samsung, LG, HTC, Sony and others all customise Android in their own way, and there's also the issue of fragmentation - only Google's Nexus devices are guaranteed to be running the most recent, unmodified version of the Android operating system.

Far more users are running iOS 9 than Android 6, though Android is on more phones overall. It's something Apple is proud of, though Google would point out its own OS is much more flexible and customisable - if you don't like the text messaging app, you can install another.

Features

Since Google decided to spin its main apps out of Android, the mobile OS itself is essentially just the app launcher and the Settings screen. In contrast, iOS updates still include updates to Mail, Maps, Safari, Notes, News and all the other apps you get with the software.

As we've noted, Google gives users and app developers more flexibility in terms of editing the way the OS works (default apps, lock screens, widgets and so on) - on iOS, you're pretty much stuck with the way Apple wants to do things (which for many users is just fine).

Visually, Android's Material Design offers a more colourful, well-defined visual interface than iOS, which hasn't had a major overhaul since 2013. Apple's OS is all translucent shades and thin lines, Google's is blocky card shapes and bold headings and fonts.

Both OSes handle multitasking in similar ways and iOS has also added a back button of its own in recent times. Both have battery saving features, mobile payments support, digital assistants, and the ability to back up all of your precious data to the cloud automatically.

Ecosystem

Both Google and Apple want to lock you into their respective app ecosystems, but Apple is far more serious about it: you won't find support for iCloud or Apple Mail on Android, whereas all of Google's apps are available (and run very well) on iPhones and iPads.

Google's focus is more on the cloud whereas Apple prefers local devices and native apps. It's pretty much all or nothing with Apple: iPhones and iPads work very well with Macs and the Apple TV, but good luck trying to get your iTunes movies to play on an Android TV box.

If you love Apple's approach, that's no problem - but it's something to bear in mind. As you would expect from the company behind Chrome OS, accessing your Google stuff on the web is much more straightforward, though Apple does now have an iCloud web interface.

If everything you own is made by Apple then iOS becomes much more appealing, whether you're trying to get at your digital music and movies, switch between the same apps on various devices, or seamlessly sync your data between phones, tablets and computers.

Native and third-party apps

As we've already said, Google's apps (Gmail, Google Maps, Google Keep and so on) are now updated independently from Android. These apps are all available on iOS too, though the versions for Google's own OS are usually slightly superior (and often updated first).

Trying to compare all of these apps against Apple's equivalents is no easy job: it's likely you've already got used to one set of apps or the other. Hangouts vs iMessage, Gmail vs Mail, Google Maps vs Apple Maps... the features are similar and there are no clear winners.

iOS has long been the winner as far as third-party app support is concerned, though the gap has closed down the years: it's now rare to find a major app or game that doesn't eventually come to both Android and iOS, even though it might launch on one or the other first.

New, experimental apps usually appear on iOS before Android: due to the fragmentation issue mentioned above, it's easier for developers to code for iOS users (and they spend more money too). Apple's platform still has the edge as far as up and coming apps go.

Google Now vs Siri

Going forward the biggest innovations in smartphone development are likely to come in the super-intelligent digital assistants: Google Now and Siri. Both give you voice-controlled access to your phone as well as smart prompts for travel and events when you need them.

Traditionally, Google Now has been more about surfacing the right info when you need it, though Apple has recently started to make Siri more proactive too. Google Now is also available on iOS in limited form, but Siri is restricted to iOS and the new Apple TV.

The apps also show the conflicting attitudes towards data privacy by these two companies: Google sweeps up as much data as it can about you across multiple platforms and services, supposedly giving Google Now a better idea of what information you're going to need when.

Siri is more locked down: more private but more limited. Both are very capable at searching the web, finding information on your phone, and accessing supported mobile apps (typically the Apple ones in Siri's case and the Google ones as far as Google Now is concerned).

Android 7.0 Nougat vs iOS 10

In the next couple of months we're going to see new OS releases from both Google and Apple - indeed if you're adventurous then you might have even installed the beta versions of these software packages, which can now be downloaded and tested free of charge.

iOS 10 isn't a huge upgrade, but it does bring with it cleaner notifications (and better lock screen access), smarter automatic tagging in Photos (like Google Photos), visual tweaks to Apple Music and Apple Maps, and more effects and emojis in iMessage (probably with WhatsApp in mind).

As for Android 7.0 Nougat, we're about to see native support for multiple windows, a dedicated VR mode, notification grouping, and the ability to run apps straight from the web without installing them first. There are several other tweaks too, including better battery performance.

Perhaps the bigger news from Google is the announcement of Allo and Duo, two apps to take on iMessage and FaceTime, though these aren't strictly linked to Android (and iOS versions will be available too). Like Apple, Google is committed to improving its behind-the-scenes AI as well.

In terms of Android vs iOS put head-to-head, this year's updates don't shift the needle in any major way, though Google looks far more committed to mobile VR at this point. Both tech titans are updating and refining their key apps, and enhancing the capabilities of their digital assistants.

As always the question with Android is just how many devices will get Nougat and how quickly - this is part of the reason why apps like Gmail and Google Maps have been spun out of the core OS, so they can be updated separately.

Conclusion

Both these platforms are slick, stable and secure, with thousands of apps available. Android is undoubtedly more customisable; iOS, you might argue, is a little more polished (especially on tablets). Visually they're quite distinctive too, taking different design approaches.

Customisation, ecosystem, apps, compatibility with other apps and devices - these are the key issues you should be weighing up when pitting Android against iOS. It's also worth considering the differences between Google Now and Siri and which one suits you best.

Unfortunately for consumers, it's more difficult than ever to jump from one OS to the other. When picking up a new handset, most people are likely to stick to what they know, and with good reason: moving wholesale from one platform to the other can be a real pain.

There are an overwhelming number of points to consider in the Android vs iOS debate and we've only got room to touch on some of them. If you've got strong opinions one way or the other - and you can back them up - then let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Google vs Alphabet

Did you know that Google doesn't actually work on driverless cars?

That's right. In fact, that's technically an Alphabet project.

Alpha-who? you might ask. Well, when Google underwent a big corporate restructuring last year, it spun off a number of its experimental projects into separate companies. Then it put all those companies, including Google, under an umbrella firm called Alphabet.

Take Google X, for instance — the development lab that's responsible for researching everything from driverless cars to balloon-based Internet to drone deliveries. Google X isn't owned by Google anymore. It's owned by Alphabet. As part of the restructuring, it even changed its name to simply "X."

If you find this confusing, you're probably not alone. So in the future, when we write about Alphabet, we're going to use the graphic below to help show how projects like drone delivery, driverless cars and smart thermostats fit into Google's business. Spoiler alert: They don't — at least organizationally.

Alphabet's so-called "Other Bets" may help create new platforms for data that Google can then use to boost its search and advertising business.

So, if you want to aim for accuracy, here's an org chart, and a description of some of the major subsidiaries below.

Alphabet: The big dog. The parent company for Google, as well as "Other Bets" including Nest, Google Fiber and X.

Google: One of several groups under Alphabet. Google contains many of the online services you know and use, such as search, Gmail, Android and Chrome.

GV, Google Capital: Alphabet's investment arms. GV (formerly Google Ventures) invests in startups as well as later-stage companies, whereas Google Capital exclusively pours its money into slightly more established firms that are technologically oriented. For example, GV has invested in Medium, Slack and Uber. Google Capital has invested in Cloudflare, Glassdoor and Duolingo.

Calico, Verily: Alphabet's biotech subsidiaries. Both are research and development labs that have hired scientists to pore over medical puzzles. Calico is focused on extending the human lifespan, whereas Verily is very interested in defeating disease.

Google Fiber: Alphabet's Internet service provider, which gives Americans in select cities access to speeds of 1 Gbps. It and Nest are two of the most financially successful subsidiaries among the Other Bets.

X: Alphabet's research lab that's responsible for its self-driving cars, balloon-based Internet and drone delivery experiments, among others.

Nest: Purchased by then-Google in 2014 for $3.2 billion, Nest is betting big on the Internet of Things. It makes smart thermostats for the home, as well as Internet-connected security cameras and smoke detectors.

Jigsaw: Alphabet's geopolitically oriented think tank. It's responsible for projects such as a data visualization of the global arms trade and studies of cyberattacks around the world.

Leader Vs Manager

Adapted from “The Wall Street Journal Guide to Management” by Alan Murray, published by Harper Business.

Leadership and management must go hand in hand. They are not the same thing. But they are necessarily linked, and complementary. Any effort to separate the two is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

Still, much ink has been spent delineating the differences. The manager’s job is to plan, organize and coordinate. The leader’s job is to inspire and motivate. In his 1989 book “On Becoming a Leader,” Warren Bennis composed a list of the differences:

– The manager administers; the leader innovates.

– The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.

– The manager maintains; the leader develops.

– The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.

– The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.

– The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.

– The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.

– The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader’s eye is on the horizon.

– The manager imitates; the leader originates.

– The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.

– The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.

– The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

Perhaps there was a time when the calling of the manager and that of the leader could be separated. A foreman in an industrial-era factory probably didn’t have to give much thought to what he was producing or to the people who were producing it. His or her job was to follow orders, organize the work, assign the right people to the necessary tasks, coordinate the results, and ensure the job got done as ordered. The focus was on efficiency.

But in the new economy, where value comes increasingly from the knowledge of people, and where workers are no longer undifferentiated cogs in an industrial machine, management and leadership are not easily separated. People look to their managers, not just to assign them a task, but to define for them a purpose. And managers must organize workers, not just to maximize efficiency, but to nurture skills, develop talent and inspire results.

The late management guru Peter Drucker was one of the first to recognize this truth, as he was to recognize so many other management truths. He identified the emergence of the “knowledge worker,” and the profound differences that would cause in the way business was organized.

With the rise of the knowledge worker, “one does not ‘manage’ people,” Mr. Drucker wrote. “The task is to lead people. And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of every individual.”