Apple Confirms 'Applebot' as In-House Web Crawler for Services Like Siri and Spotlight

[bbeagle]

Anti-trust laws.

That's the true answer.

Apple can sit back and do all their product integration - Apple Watch only works with iPhone, AirPlay only works with their devices, Apple Maps only works with Apple devices, AppleTV is and will be integrated in their ecosystem.... BECAUSE of Google.

If Google wasn't there with the overwhelming percentage of marketshare, Apple couldn't do all this. But because of Google, they can.

It's also interesting to note that if you decide to only make higher-priced items, thereby not being able to achieve the most marketshare, you won't be guilty of anything anti-trust. Apple is very smart in all this for NOT going to the lower end of the market. Apple products wouldn't be as good. The integration part is what makes Apple products better than the competition.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You are aware that there are teams/divisions at Apple. The people who are working on Apple Maps are different from the people who are working on your bug fixes. Then they probably submit their work to another team that puts it all together. It's not like the engineers are going back and forward between iCloud, Map, iTunes, and now this.

Yes, I completely get that. I completely understand that Apple is a HUGE company with tons of human resource talent capable of working on many things at once. Yet, it's also the same company that will sometimes announce a delay to the launch of one thing because those resources had to be shifted to help finish up another (such as pulling talent off OS X to finish iOS new versions).

And I can also very much support the idea of dedicated teams of talent focused on building next big things as what I see as a weakness of Apple is not accelerating the pace at which they roll out next big things to keep up with their growth curve. If Apple wants to keep growing like it has over the last decade+, it needs to be rolling out "next big thing" stuff like iPod, iPhone and iPad at an accelerating pace.

That said though: is THIS a "next big thing" project? How about the premium Spotify replacement? How about Maps? How about iDrive? And on and on. Is all that stuff good? Desirable? Sure I guess, but it can also seem like Apple is splintering focus to many, many things when stuff back at it's core still has issues.

If Apple is hiring developers to build search engine tools or premium Spotify replacements, great! How about hiring a few more developers to "catch up" Maps and squash iOS 8 bugs before they are rolling out iOS 9? Etc.

The comment about focus is not actually whining for Apple to be small or focus ONLY on a few things. It's voicing a concern about Apple trying to be ALL things, which is sometimes how it can look when there are thread topics like this one.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Go Apple (search) go! Am sick of all that "Do no Evil" BS.

Since Apple does no evil and only cares about the consumer's best interest?

 

[TMRJIJ]

The comment about focus is not actually whining for Apple to be small or focus ONLY on a few things. It's voicing a concern about Apple trying to be all things, which is sometimes how it can look when there are thread topics like this one.

Oh okay, I see what you mean.

 

[TechRemarker]

Apple is building search because they do not want to rely on a competitor, google. Switching to Bing would appear bad because they will be offering a lower quality product to users. Yes they did that with Apple Maps but at least that was in favor of moving in house. Moving to another competitor who is worse is a lose lose. Moving to an Apple Search from Google search would be a certain downgrade to users and I don't think Apple is anywhere ready for offering a Google replacement. Rather than are simply bringing some app searches in-house.

Apple Spotlight even fails in comparison to small competitors like Alfred. If Apple can't be the best at indexing a person's own computer they have no shot at indexing the world wide web properly.

 

[thekeyring]

That's the true answer.

Apple can sit back and do all their product integration - Apple Watch only works with iPhone, AirPlay only works with their devices, Apple Maps only works with Apple devices, AppleTV is and will be integrated in their ecosystem.... BECAUSE of Google.

If Google wasn't there with the overwhelming percentage of marketshare, Apple couldn't do all this. But because of Google, they can.

So if iPhone had a majority market share, would Apple be allowed to sell iPhone cases? Or not, because they - like Apple Watch - only work with iPhone?

And they wouldn't be allowed to implement Apple Maps into their OS? What's next - they can't ship Safari with iOS? Or the notification centre?

If that's true, then the law is really messed up.

 

[petsounds]

Exactly. Apple's focus should be on making Siri and Spotlight best in class. I don't think anyone can say Siri is best in class right now. We know Microsoft has big plans for Cortana so Apple can't afford to let Siri fall further behind.

I have a feeling this Applebot is more about improving Siri's ability to parse and use web-based information in order to better act on user requests, rather than being a strictly user search engine. It may just exist as part of that, and never surface as something users can type queries into.

I do agree that it seems like Apple has been missing the boat on turning Siri into a true intelligent agent as Google and MS are trying to do. I've long been critical of Apple for basically just adding new 3rd-party APIs to Siri, making little improvements in its ability to understand requests and context. But, this kind of assistant only works when you give it knowledge of everything about you and your life, and that becomes kind of at odds with Apple's stance on user privacy.

 

[MacHiavelli]

Maybe they should buy www.gouk.com and turn that into a search engine. Distinct enough, but also close enough to tread on google's toes.

 

[Michael Goff]

Why not just buy Google?

It would be funny for Apple to just but and take out the competition. I read that they would actually have enough money to buy both Google and Miscrosoft,mane still have a little change left

Who told you that they had anywhere near enough money to buy out Google OR Microsoft, let alone both?

hes not being ridiculous -- on the iOS platform, apple has stolen the maps market share. heres a story on it from two years ago:

https://www.macrumors.com/2013/11/1...-all-other-ios-mapping-apps-including-google/

...that will only have continued to get worse for GM on iOS.

----------



yes, the consumer knows the difference in sizes -- and thats what most of those are. nobody counts the number of different sizes in the macbook lines, so your comparison is off.

Yep, AM has a majority of the roughly 12 or so % of users that use iOS devices. I use it, even, because it's there.

Anti-trust laws.

And money, can't forget the money aspect.

Since Apple does no evil and only cares about the consumer's best interest?

Obviously.

It's like how Apple sues and they're "just trying to protect their IP", but anyone sues Apple and they're just patent trolls.

 

[Godzilla71]

Time for the Apple bot to quit crawling and start running.

 

[bbeagle]

So if iPhone had a majority market share, would Apple be allowed to sell iPhone cases? Or not, because they - like Apple Watch - only work with iPhone?

And they wouldn't be allowed to implement Apple Maps into their OS? What's next - they can't ship Safari with iOS? Or the notification centre?

If that's true, then the law is really messed up.

If Apple had a 90% iPhone market share, yes, Safari and Apple Maps could not be defaults.

Google has the 90% marketshare and is now being sued for putting YouTube (owned by Google) on their devices.

So, yes, that's how the law works, and it's NOT really messed up. It makes sense.

 

[Michael Goff]

If Apple had a 90% iPhone market share, yes, Safari and Apple Maps could not be defaults.

Google has the 90% marketshare and is now being sued for putting YouTube (owned by Google) on their devices.

So, yes, that's how the law works, and it's NOT really messed up. It makes sense.

Google has all of their services as defaults for Android phones if the manufacturers want the store.

 

[bbeagle]

Google has all of their services as defaults for Android phones if the manufacturers want the store.

And Google is being sued for this right now.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/google-sidesteps-lawsuit-over-its-android-apps/2015-04-06

EDIT: This lawsuit has been dropped, but it will come up again no doubt.

 

[thekeyring]

If Apple had a 90% iPhone market share, yes, Safari and Apple Maps could not be defaults.

Google has the 90% marketshare and is now being sued for putting YouTube (owned by Google) on their devices.

So, yes, that's how the law works, and it's NOT really messed up. It makes sense.

I've just looked into that - it's a difficult issue. Did Google get in trouble for advertising Chrome on it's homepage?

I just can't agree with a law that stops Google (or anyone) from adding any feature to their OS, simply because the OS is dominant. When does a piece of software stop being an OS feature and become it's own separate product?

The app draw is a feature of Android, but Google aren't in trouble because their app draw is putting other app draws out of business?

Should Google also be in trouble because so many people have Android phones they don't wear watches - so they're using their marketshare to take over the timekeeping industry?

 

[Michael Goff]

And Google is being sued for this right now.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/google-sidesteps-lawsuit-over-its-android-apps/2015-04-06

EDIT: This lawsuit has been dropped, but it will come up again no doubt.

I doubt it will ever come up again. Google plays by different rules. :\

 

[justperry]

I would downvote you if I could.

There is so much fail in this post! You are confusing Google search results in the main column with paid advertised search results on the right column.

You cannot - I repeat - you cannot influence the normal search results with money! There are hundreds of criteria how Google calculates the "page ranking" (download speed of the page itself, distribution of key words, links from other sites, ...)... but money is not one of them!

Erm, who failed/fails

The EU Investigates Google for Anti-Competitive Behavior

European commission reopens Google antitrust investigation

In May 2012 Almunia said there were four key areas of concern about Google’s business: its links to its own “vertical search” services such as Google Shopping, YouTube and Maps over rivals, the copying of content from competing vertical search companies, restrictions on rivals advertising on sites using Google ads, and the portability of advertising campaigns from Google’s system.

 

[jdawgnoonan]

Tough to compete with Google, especially in its bread and butter. But just like Apple Maps has taken huge market share from Google Maps (and I believe growing as iPhone takes market share from PCs and Android Smart Phones), I suspect this search will take market share from Google.

For me, using Apple Maps only occurs by accident. I use Google Maps and curse my phone whenever I click a link that opens Apple Maps. I tried Apple maps about a month ago to get directions to my wife's office using my wife's location shared from her iPhone (I had never been to her office before). She works in an office directly next to Interstate 80 in Des Moines, Iowa. Apple Maps seemed to want me to pull onto the shoulder of the Interstate to pick her up.....back to Google again.

 

[tennisproha]

Interesting. But just as Apple Maps is no match for Google Maps, the same will probably be true of an Apple search engine vs Google search.

Have you used Apple Maps lately? It's pretty incredible now.

what you're referencing was a long long time ago.

 

[jdawgnoonan]

Have you used Apple Maps lately? It's pretty incredible now.

what you're referencing was a long long time ago.

I don't find it to be incredible on my 6 Plus. In Des Moines it directed me to pick my wife up on the shoulder of the Interstate when she was standing in front of an office 200 yards away from that point (location shared by her iPhone) and it seems not to understand the concept of one way streets. The UI is pretty, but other than that I am not impressed.

 

[justperry]

For me, using Apple Maps only occurs by accident. I use Google Maps and curse my phone whenever I click a link that opens Apple Maps. I tried Apple maps about a month ago to get directions to my wife's office using my wife's location shared from her iPhone (I had never been to her office before). She works in an office directly next to Interstate 80 in Des Moines, Iowa. Apple Maps seemed to want me to pull onto the shoulder of the Interstate to pick her up.....back to Google again.

So you used Apple Maps just one single time and based on that single time it sux.

/Facepalm

 

[jdawgnoonan]

So you used Apple Maps just one single time and based on that single time it sux.

/Facepalm

I used it another time recently to find a rib joint downtown (Yelp app directions open in Apple Maps and so i tried it that time too). Two different times during that trip it advised me to go the wrong way on one way streets. Yes, based on the number of times that I have tried it recently (twice in three months), and based on the fact that both times I did it failed, I do believe for myself it "sux."

I have navigated around Frankfurt, Paris, Chicago, Washington D.C., St. Louis, and Des Moines with nothing but Google Maps and have never been advised to go the wrong way on a one way street.

/Whatever

 

[Reason077]

Have you used Apple Maps lately? It's pretty incredible now.

Heh. It's better than it was, sure. But I wouldn't go so far as to say "incredible".

It's definitely not in the same league as Google Maps in most respects.

 

[TallManNY]

For me, using Apple Maps only occurs by accident. I use Google Maps and curse my phone whenever I click a link that opens Apple Maps. I tried Apple maps about a month ago to get directions to my wife's office using my wife's location shared from her iPhone (I had never been to her office before). She works in an office directly next to Interstate 80 in Des Moines, Iowa. Apple Maps seemed to want me to pull onto the shoulder of the Interstate to pick her up.....back to Google again.

Google Maps is fantastic. I doubt Apple will ever really catch all the way up. But Apple Maps loads faster and I believe uses less data to do so. I use Maps for day to day, then Google maps for the tough stuff or if I want to double check estimated drive time.

But Google Maps had nearly 100% of iOS search and map use. Now it has much less.

 

[tennisproha]

Heh. It's better than it was, sure. But I wouldn't go so far as to say "incredible".

It's definitely not in the same league as Google Maps in most respects.

The only thing I've found Google Maps to do better is traffic and business info. Other than that, I think Apple Maps navigation and UI are much superior. esp the navi UI but both individually as well. plus the satelittle maps are alway in 3D. even in overhead eagle eye view, you can see the facades change as you pan. I think that's really cool.

And I might be the only one, but I think free access flyover is much more useful than just street view.

----------

I don't find it to be incredible on my 6 Plus. In Des Moines it directed me to pick my wife up on the shoulder of the Interstate when she was standing in front of an office 200 yards away from that point (location shared by her iPhone) and it seems not to understand the concept of one way streets. The UI is pretty, but other than that I am not impressed.

seems to be an occasional thing. you found plenty of these stories on google maps when it first launched and still do. the UI is not only pretty, it's much more useful.

 

[jdawgnoonan]

The only thing I've found Google Maps to do better is traffic and business info. Other than that, I think Apple Maps navigation and UI are much superior. esp the navi UI but both individually as well. plus the satelittle maps are alway in 3D. even in overhead eagle eye view, you can see the facades change as you pan. I think that's really cool.

And I might be the only one, but I think free access flyover is much more useful than just street view.

----------



seems to be an occasional thing. you found plenty of these stories on google maps when it first launched and still do. the UI is not only pretty, it's much more useful.

I bicycle and the bicycle routes in Google Maps are pretty useful, but I am not taking away from what you say. If you prefer Apple Maps that is awesome. I prefer Google and my track record with Google is a lot better in my personal use.