The Fear Known as ‘Sherlocking’
In the world of software development, this phenomenon has a name: getting “Sherlocked.” The term dates back to the early 2000s when Apple released a desktop search tool called Sherlock 2, which incorporated all the key features of a popular third-party
app called Watson. Almost overnight, Watson was rendered obsolete. The developer was crushed, and a verb was born. Today, Sherlocking is shorthand for the existential risk developers face when building for a major platform like iOS. The platform owner—in this case, Apple—has the ultimate power. It can observe which app categories are gaining traction, identify the most innovative features, and then decide to build its own version directly into the operating system. For Apple, this is a logical move. Native features are often faster, better integrated, and reinforce the value of the iPhone ecosystem. For the startup that pioneered the idea, it can be a death sentence.
A Pattern of Platform Power
While the headline’s “WWDC 2026” is speculative, the strategy it describes is well-established. Each year, developers watch Apple's keynote with a mix of excitement and dread. In recent years, Apple has rolled out features that tread on the turf of successful apps. Apple’s password management features in iCloud Keychain directly compete with standalone services like 1Password and LastPass. The introduction of the native Journal app put it in competition with established journaling apps like Day One. The expansion of home screen widgets challenged the entire cottage industry of apps, like Widgetsmith, that had sprung up to offer that exact customization. This isn't necessarily born from malice. Apple's goal is to create the best possible user experience to sell more iPhones, iPads, and Macs. If a feature becomes popular enough, it makes strategic sense to make it a core part of the OS. But this creates a fundamental conflict: the very ecosystem that allows startups to flourish also holds the power to extinguish them. It’s the ultimate “platform risk,” a danger unique to building a business on someone else’s property.
The ‘iPhone First’ Calculation
So why do startups continue to flock to iOS, knowing they could be Sherlocked at any moment? The answer is simple: that’s where the customers are. The App Store provides unparalleled access to hundreds of millions of users who are conditioned to pay for high-quality software. For many consumer-facing startups, launching on iPhone isn't a choice; it's a necessity. The prestige, discoverability, and monetization potential of the App Store remain unmatched. Developers are not naive. They understand the risk and make a calculated bet. Many hope to innovate fast enough to stay ahead of Apple, build a brand so strong that users stick with them even when a native alternative appears, or get acquired before the hammer falls. Some even see being Sherlocked as a form of validation—proof that their idea was good enough for Apple to copy. But validation doesn't pay the bills or support a team of employees.
The Future of App Innovation
This tension between platform owner and developer is now at the heart of regulatory debates in the U.S. and Europe. Critics argue that companies like Apple use their control over the operating system to stifle competition, giving their own services an unfair advantage. Apple counters that it is simply improving its product and that competition ultimately benefits consumers. The outcome of these legal and regulatory battles could reshape the rules of the game, potentially placing limits on Apple’s ability to absorb third-party features. Until then, the strategy of “it works on iPhone first” will remain a powerful, and often frustrating, force. For every startup that succeeds on the App Store, there’s another looking over its shoulder, hoping that the next big iOS update doesn't make their product irrelevant. It’s the price of admission to the world's most lucrative digital marketplace.
