Should the Google/Apple deal come to an end, it could be several years before changes are required.
Will for sure happen sooner in the EU! 😘
Will for sure happen sooner in the EU! 😘
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Gets 36% of Google's Safari Search Revenue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is if it stops the competitor from making bad products.
The world is a better place without an Apple search engine for the World Wide Web.
There is no privacy issue here. No personal information is being sent.
The user is voluntarily searching the Internet and the user knows the information is being sent to Google since the result comes from Google.
There is no way to use a search engine unless you send the search term you want to search for. Also HTTP has certain requirements about what kind of information must be in the headers.
Apple isn't critical about sending HTTP requests with no personal data. They're critical of tracking based on huge amount of data collected from many sources without the user knowing how it's being used.
This is what every monopoly defender says about their product. It was even often used as the actual business rationale for why you couldn’t say…use any other hardware but ma bell’s
First of all, you cannot know for sure that Apple's search engine would be bad.
Furthermore, even if it were bad, it could still drive Google or other competitors to provide a better service by merely existing, or even by merely being in the works.
Lastly, it should be consumers that kill a bad product, not competitors that prevent products from getting their fair chance in the market.
Big yikes. This is a bad look for both companies. Not that it's much of a surprise, or that the three people who see this article and decide to take a stand by changing their default search engine will make any difference, but still... I feel bad for anyone stupid enough to believe the "free market" myth.
Yes, we can. Apple search has been bad on iPhones since its start.
It's not Apple's job or any other company to provide competition in a certain market. We have one good search engine and we don't need more. All the other search engines are worse, especially outside the US.
No, I disagree that there should be a level playing field between companies.
No, you cannot since you don't know how much more Apple would have invested in research for search engines through the years without Google's deal.
It definitely is, that's why anti-trust regulations exist.
You are entitled your opinion no matter how wrong it is.
As the title of the article says, "Apple Gets 36% of Google's Safari Search Revenue" and that share is evaluated in the tens of billions of dollars. If you believe Google does not monetize those searches by fueling its targeted advertising then I have a bridge to sell you.
Google clearly ultimately makes that money through targeted advertising and Apple has been vocal in criticizing Google's targeted advertising practices. They still take a share of the revenue though, which is what is hypocritical on their part.
i would say yes discouraging competition is bad. but, apple as competition? definitely good. apple will definitely ram their search down our throats and force us to use it.
i'm thinking about siri. siri is really pretty bad. but that's what we have to deal with.
i'm thinking about siri. siri is really pretty bad. but that's what we have to deal with.
I think part of the point is that Siri being bad may very well be influenced by deals like this in ways that are hard to map out because we can’t predict alternative pasts.
We don’t know what Apple or Microsoft or someone else would have done better (or worse) without this deal ever happening
It’s amazing how fast $9 billion went to $16 billion went to $20 billion plus.
And they nickel and dime us on ram and storage. lol
As Google battles an antitrust lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice, secrets about its search deals with Apple have been leaking out. We previously learned that Google is paying Apple billions of dollars to be the primary search engine on Apple devices, and now, Bloomberg has shared the total percentage of Google's revenue that Apple earns.
Google pays Apple 36 percent of the total revenue that it earns from searches conducted on the Safari browser on the iPhone, iPad, and Mac, with the number shared by an economics expert testifying on Apple's behalf. According to Bloomberg, Google's main lawyer "visibly cringed" when the revenue data was shared, as it was meant to remain confidential.
Last month, wealth management company Bernstein suggested that Apple is getting anywhere from $18 billion to $20 billion per year, representing somewhere around 15 percent of Apple's total annual operating profits.
Apple and Google have both worked to keep details in the antitrust lawsuit private, claiming that publicly sharing the information would "undermine Google's competitive standing."
Google has been the default search engine on Apple devices since 2002, though the agreement between the two tech companies has been revised multiple times. Apple earns a ton of money from the deal, while Google gets to be the default search option on the world's most popular smartphone.
The United States Department of Justice is investigating Google because it believes that Google has a search monopoly. Google's lucrative search engine deal with Apple has been a main focus of the legal battle, which is expected to last until the end of November.
In October, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that the agreement between Apple and Google has made it impossible for other search engines like Bing to compete. "You get up in the morning, you brush your teeth, and you search on Google," said Nadella. "With that level of habit forming, the only way to change is by changing defaults."
Microsoft at one point approached Apple about buying Bing, which would have allowed Apple to create its own search engine, but Apple was not interested. The company was concerned that Bing would not be able to compete with Google in "quality and capabilities," and also, Apple had no motivation to lose out on the money that it earns from Google.
Apple services chief Eddy Cue testified in the trial in October, and he said that Google is the iPhone's default search engine because it is the best option. "We make Google be the default search engine because we've always thought it was the best," Cue said. Apple has not been able to make changes to the arrangement because there is no "valid alternative."
While Google is the default search engine on Apple devices, users can opt to swap to Yahoo, Bing, DuckDuckGo, or Ecosia as an alternative, but doing so requires going into the Safari browser's settings.
If Google loses the antitrust lawsuit, and there is a chance that could happen, the deal between Apple and Google could be dissolved. Apple could be pushed into allowing customers to choose a search engine option when setting up an Apple device rather than having Google set as the default.
Losing out on billions of dollars from Google could potentially be the catalyst Apple needs to develop its own search engine, and Apple has indeed considered building a search solution. Apple's AI chief John Giannandrea runs a search team within Apple, and that team has developed a next-generation search engine for Apple apps that could potentially serve as the basis for a full Google Search alternative.
Should the Google/Apple deal come to an end, it could be several years before changes are required. A decision in the lawsuit won't come for some time, and once its does, we can expect a lengthy appeals process if it does not go Google's way.
Article Link: Apple Gets 36% of Google's Safari Search Revenue
How is it a bribe? The default browser on iPhones is Safari. Google is paying for the privilege of being the default Search engine. Google keeps 74% of the revenue generated.
If it's not a bribe, then what do you call it when Alphabet/Google pays Apple to not develop their own search engine that would compete with Google?
Google Is Paying Apple a Lot of Money Not to Build a Search Engine. Why It's Just Not Worth It
The money Apple gets isn't worth the conflict with its values.www.inc.com
Before Google, there was Yahoo! Remember those days? Google came along with a unique approach of using massive farms of commodity hardware, allowing them to crunch search data super fast, and provide superior results.
It's not a trivial task to understand search as well as Google has. Apple could not do it easily.
Let's ignore the fact that they have turned industries on their heads... music, mobile computing, longer battery life.
It's called the User-Agent string... sent with every web request, to every site you visit. Tells the site which browser is making the request.
You can actually change which User-Agent string is sent. It's a handy way to make sites think you're using a different browser.
It's about Apple favoring and benefiting financially from a company like Google which has business practices they claim to be opposed to.
Oh, I’m most certain there’s “a way” apple can verify the numbers “independently”.
But, unless Google gives Apple the keys to all their back end ad data and revenue processing engine (not going to happen), they’re basically going off of numbers that Google is providing them with. OR going off of numbers that some “independent” third party has ascertained… using Google’s tools.So, yes, in this and in a lot of tech businesses engagements, it really does amount to “trust us”. As long as the dollars are in an acceptable range, Apple’s not going to quibble over 47 users they’re sure searched from Chippewa County.
Even if Apple had to add the capability to set the default search engine upon launching Safari after it's added, iOS users like myself would still choose Google. Freedom of choice is all but an illusion. Ruling in Google's favor would set a precedent for any web browser that automatically sets the default search engine.
I’ve switched back to google from DDG. 😂
DDG results all lead to MS news. I tried Ecosia which constantly requests to install non-essential cookies.
I rather have Apple profit than MS.
I wish there was a law banning the buying of personal data.
DDG results all lead to MS news. I tried Ecosia which constantly requests to install non-essential cookies.
I rather have Apple profit than MS.
I wish there was a law banning the buying of personal data.
Well to be fair it is providing perverse incentives to look between the eyes if Google does something shady with regards to your privacy, or to try and favour Google Adsense in safari to increase the revenue.
A few percentage points efficiency translates to many billions
There a very good reason why google almost gives Apple 40% of their revenue just for the simple act of being the default option.
The default is that powerful and influential compared to if users have a choice or another option was the default.
Yep, and having such a lucrative deal makes me afraid it perverts their incentives.
Especially when it’s such a large part of their bottom line