Apple Losing Talent to Google Amid Push to Improve Spotlight and Launch Search Engine

[I7guy]

This is not about being a "legal" opinion, it's about studying and analyzing user habits. These have shown that most don't change default settings.

However, the DOJ does have a "legal" opinion and is planning to go to court against Google for paying Apple and others billions to maintain its dominance in search.

"Google invests billions in defaults, knowing people won’t change them," Dintzer told Judge Amit Mehta during a hearing in Washington that marked the first major face-off in the case and drew top DOJ antitrust officials and Nebraska’s attorney general among the spectators. "They are buying default exclusivity because defaults matter a lot."

Google pays ‘enormous’ sums to maintain search-engine dominance, DOJ says

Google’s contracts form the basis of the DOJ’s landmark antitrust lawsuit, which alleges the company has sought to maintain its online search monopoly in violation of antitrust laws.

fortune.com

Okay, but no proof, just some hearsay. We'll see where this all goes. But people aren't stoopid (yes purposefully) as we make them out to be. They know google from bing. Google may well wind up by NOT paying apple a cent, but it won't make a difference, imo.

 

[webkit]

Okay, but no proof, just some hearsay. We'll see where this all goes. But people aren't stoopid (yes purposefully) as we make them out to be. They know google from bing. Google may well wind up by NOT paying apple a cent, but it won't make a difference, imo.

With all of the articles/reports/studies concluding that most users don't change default settings combined with Google's willingness to pay billions and billions for default positions, the logical conclusion seems to be that most people don’t bother to change default settings. Apple has helped Google gain and/or maintain its dominance in search.

 

[I7guy]

With all of the articles/reports/studies concluding that most users don't change default settings combined with Google's willingness to pay billions and billions for default positions, the logical conclusion seems to be that most people don’t bother to change default settings. Apple has helped Google gain and/or maintain its dominance in search.

Yes, I understand there is a lot of anecdotal evidence supporting people don't change default settings, but there doesn't seem to be any concrete studies of what settings people change or leave and how they setup their phone. The conclusion is that people want google anyway and those that don't can change their default search engine. And google is willing to pay for that.

Google is to the search engine business at this point in time as Microsoft is to the desktop computing business. While Apple may be worth more, it's penetration into the consumer market place is far less.

 

[webkit]

Yes, I understand there is a lot of anecdotal evidence supporting people don't change default settings, but there doesn't seem to be any concrete studies of what settings people change or leave and how they setup their phone. The conclusion is that people want google anyway and those that don't can change their default search engine. And google is willing to pay for that.

Why would Google continue to pay so much to be the default if people were going to use Google for search anyway?

Google is to the search engine business at this point in time as Microsoft is to the desktop computing business. While Apple may be worth more, it's penetration into the consumer market place is far less.

Apple's penetration into the consumer market is significant and they are very influential (especially in North America, Japan, various countries in Europe, etc.) in the mobile OS market, and business activities related to that market.

 

[I7guy]

Why would Google continue to pay so much to be the default if people were going to use Google for search anyway?

Much along the lines of why the worlds pre-eminent soda company- Coca-Cola would pay millions to advertise during halftime? For two companies that are very dominant in their line of work for people who live under that proverbial rock, it helps attract new customers. Those who may have never used a search engine in their life, don't know about the internet. It's a drop in the buck to google, why not?

Apple's penetration into the consumer market is significant and they are very influential (especially in North America, Japan, various countries in Europe, etc.) in the mobile OS market, and business activities related to that market.

It's true by different metrics Apples phones outsell the competition on a phone by phone basis. The collective of the o/s android is dominant although it flips-flops. Influential should not have anything to do with anything. Google would still retain 9x% of the search market, imo, even if they didn't pay apple one cent. Instead they would advertise more than they do.

 

[webkit]

Much along the lines of why the worlds pre-eminent soda company- Coca-Cola would pay millions to advertise during halftime? For two companies that are very dominant in their line of work for people who live under that proverbial rock, it helps attract new customers. Those who may have never used a search engine in their life, don't know about the internet. It's a drop in the buck to google, why not?

It's true by different metrics Apples phones outsell the competition on a phone by phone basis. The collective of the o/s android is dominant although it flips-flops. Influential should not have anything to do with anything. Google would still retain 9x% of the search market, imo, even if they didn't pay apple one cent. Instead they would advertise more than they do.

The beverage business is more competitive than you may realize and Coke (and others) spend money on advertising as a way to increase brand image/value and maintain or increase market share not only among consumers but retailers (restaurants, concession stands, etc.). Advertising (or a lack of advertising or the wrong type of advertising) can have a notable impact on their sales and market share. And while I realize these are completely different industries, the amount Coke spends on advertising each year is a tiny fraction of what Google pays Apple alone to be the default search on Safari. What Google pays Apple and others to be the default is not just a "drop in the bucket" and is actually a notable portion of their search profits.

By agreeing to make Google the default search on Safari, Apple has continued to help Google maintain or increase its share of the search market. Eliminating that agreement would have a meaningful impact on Google's search business which is why Google continues to pay so much and is going to be fighting the DOJ in court to try to be able to keep the agreement(s) going as long as possible.

 

[I7guy]

The beverage business is more competitive than you may realize and Coke (and others) spend money on advertising as a way to increase brand image/value and maintain or increase market share not only among consumers but retailers (restaurants, concession stands, etc.). Advertising (or a lack of advertising or the wrong type of advertising) can have a notable impact on their sales and market share. And while I realize these are completely different industries, the amount Coke spends on advertising each year is a tiny fraction of what Google pays Apple alone to be the default search on Safari. What Google pays Apple and others to be the default is not just a "drop in the bucket" and is actually a notable portion of their search profits.

Can't seem to quantify the number of new users who have opted in from inaction vs the number of users who have opted out by changing the default. obviously google feels it's worth it. Just like Coke feels it's worth it to advertise during halftime. The search engine landscape must be littered with about 50, but the top one, google leads by a landslide. So there is plenty of competition, but google wins by popularity.

By agreeing to make Google the default search on Safari, Apple has continued to help Google maintain or increase its share of the search market. Eliminating that agreement would have a meaningful impact on Google's search business which is why Google continues to pay so much and is going to be fighting the DOJ in court to try to be able to keep the agreement(s) going as long as possible.

I doubt it would have a "meaningful" impact. Maybe a "nominal" impact. But we will see where this all winds up.

 

[DeepIn2U]

The internet doesn’t work differently if google is still chosen by default or choice. The customer is stupid meme at this point is old and hackneyed.

I may be misunderstanding you here. Yet any customer with internet connection that searches the internet for any topic/content via a browser of their choice will have different results (beyond ads) in their initial and subsequent results based on their search engine.

Search a phone number (prefix+area code+suffix) with or without hyphens will get more results than say DuckDuckGo!

Social media apps are heavily being used as a source of information (false facts, how To’s, political influence and views) amongst youth and young adults (under 25y old) today and the past decade as I’m sure you’re aware.

The internet - what’s on it indeed - doesn’t change based on the customers search engine of choice. Yet the internet perceived heavily changes what the customer is shown on results or what they lack to search elsewhere. Ultimately shaping their view of “the internet”.

Google are wasting $15b a year. Fact is if Apple tried to get people to use something else everyone (90%+) will switch back to Google as default.

We don’t search it, we Google it.

For those of us a generation older than when Google debuted, that lexicon is THE reason for their source of growth, popularity, and ultimate foothold power for internet browsers and all of us that search the internet.

I’ve recently chosen to go back to “search for it/search it up” or “search the internet” vs “brand it”. I’m not being paid by Google and even though I use it, it’s not exclusive.

Google made 2 of THE most critical moves to make themselves a juggernaut:

1. That lexicon catch phrase used across universities, colleges and high schools during the debut year until it became a common use everywhere.

2. Chrome browser.
Having their own browser and unifying the URL bar with the search bar was genius. Sure I think 1 other browser did this but directly allowed you to switch before hitting enter key (Chrome removed this after year 1 or never did cannot recall) was the key.

To this day even on mobile phones many youth don’t know the difference between an internet search and a brand it search.

 

[I7guy]

I may be misunderstanding you here. Yet any customer with internet connection that searches the internet for any topic/content via a browser of their choice will have different results (beyond ads) in their initial and subsequent results based on their search engine.

Search a phone number (prefix+area code+suffix) with or without hyphens will get more results than say DuckDuckGo!

Social media apps are heavily being used as a source of information (false facts, how To’s, political influence and views) amongst youth and young adults (under 25y old) today and the past decade as I’m sure you’re aware.

The internet - what’s on it indeed - doesn’t change based on the customers search engine of choice. Yet the internet perceived heavily changes what the customer is shown on results or what they lack to search elsewhere. Ultimately shaping their view of “the internet”.
[...]

Definitely wasn't very clear. Many object to google giving apple $$$ for making google the default search engine thus contributing to googles 90%+ dominance for searches and runs afoul of anti-trust laws. I'm making the case that with 50% of google searches coming from non-mobile google is chosen as the default. It's my contention if the $$$ stopped, many would choose google anyway, because like Coke, it's a household name with a lot of brand recognition. It's people who are giving up their privacy to google willingly and not the $$$ that are causing it. The internet works the same way regardless if google pays apple or not.

 

[webkit]

2. Chrome browser.
Having their own browser and unifying the URL bar with the search bar was genius. Sure I think 1 other browser did this but directly allowed you to switch before hitting enter key (Chrome removed this after year 1 or never did cannot recall) was the key.

The creation of this functionality has helped bring in money for a variety of browsers as Google has not only paid Apple but also Mozilla (Firefox), Brave, Opera, etc. to be the default search. This "gravy train" may come to an end for these browsers depending on how next year's DOJ v. Google antitrust case goes.

 

[MacBH928]

This is not about being a "legal" opinion, it's about studying and analyzing user habits. These have shown that most don't change default settings.

Correct. People will open a device and use. they couldn't care less about changing any defaults. At least for most of them

Okay, but no proof, just some hearsay. We'll see where this all goes. But people aren't stoopid (yes purposefully) as we make them out to be. They know google from bing.

No they do not. I saw a person who used a HTPC (Windows) and thought it was a cable tv box of some sort. Another got Android tablet and thought it was Windows running on it.

It's my contention if the $$$ stopped, many would choose google anyway, because like Coke, it's a household name with a lot of brand recognition. It's people who are giving up their privacy to google willingly and not the $$$ that are causing it. The internet works the same way regardless if google pays apple or not.

You are correct. People think "the thing that searches the internet is called google" so even if you default to Bing they might search "Google" and go from there. Its like someone thinks that water is called "nestle" . If he wants to drink water he will say "bring me a bottle of Nestle".

heck I even saw a person calling the Chrome browser Google, he said "open Google"

The creation of this functionality has helped bring in money for a variety of browsers as Google has not only paid Apple but also Mozilla (Firefox), Brave, Opera, etc. to be the default search. This "gravy train" may come to an end for these browsers depending on how next year's DOJ v. Google antitrust case goes.

I do not think Brave is reliant on Google any more they have their own search engine now. As for Mozilla they deserve it. Organization has been around since 2004 still did not find a way to sustain itself as a non-profit while the CEO raises her salary and fires employees. Heck in that time ProtonMail and Mullvad VPN has launched and sustained themselves financially, in fact they are thriving! Even Brave did the same!

There is another sad story though. There is no usable search engine in the world except for Google or Bing. They are called crawlers. Everyone else is just a middle man. No google no bing, no internet search world wide. You can see this on the https://www.searchenginemap.com/ .

There is:-
Mojeek: its independent but their results are no where as good as google. I cant recommend to any one.
Brave: They claim they are independent and sometimes they rely on 3rd party crawlers. They claim 92% independence. The results are too good to be independent. No one has done this yet other than them.
Baidu: China only
Yandex: I think it is independent but relies on Bing in a mixed results. Russian.

 

[webkit]

I do not think Brave is reliant on Google any more they have their own search engine now.

The current version of Brave still sets Google as the default in the "Normal Window" while Brave (search) is set as the default in the "Private Window."

There is another sad story though. There is no usable search engine in the world except for Google or Bing. They are called crawlers. Everyone else is just a middle man. No google no bing, no internet search world wide. You can see this on the https://www.searchenginemap.com/ .

There is:-
Mojeek: its independent but their results are no where as good as google. I cant recommend to any one.
Brave: They claim they are independent and sometimes they rely on 3rd party crawlers. They claim 92% independence. The results are too good to be independent. No one has done this yet other than them.
Baidu: China only
Yandex: I think it is independent but relies on Bing in a mixed results. Russian.

Yes. Most other search engines are typically powered at least to some degree by either Google or Bing. Of course, these others are still able to generate money through ad placements so in that sense they are independent.

 

[Klae17]

Same thing happened to Nokia. Remember them. Yep, not so much. It is easy to drain money into profits. It does not take a rocket scientist.

Apparently it does because you do not understand. Nokia's market cap is 26 billion. That is what apple makes in ONE QUARTER. I think they are fine without your uneducated opinion.

 

[MacBH928]

The current version of Brave still sets Google as the default in the "Normal Window" while Brave (search) is set as the default in the "Private Window."

I think this is just because most people rather use Google and Brave search, in all due respect to themselves, they know its not as good as Google especially with local results. Brave wants people to continue to use Brave browser as their default and do not want people start using the browser and thinking "This does not have Google, this sucks" then go back to using Chrome.

So yeah, I see what they did there and I have to agree with them. But I do not think Google pays them a penny. They tear Google all day long about privacy meanwhile Mozilla and Firefox tread lightly, and DDG do not dare to even mention Microsoft as they their business "partners".

Yes. Most other search engines are typically powered at least to some degree by either Google or Bing. Of course, these others are still able to generate money through ad placements so in that sense they are independent.

They are independent financially but it does not help the world that we still need to rely on Google. Thats what Brave and Mojeek is doing. Google can shut down and it won't affect them (or so they say). DDG and others can not say the same. Google shuts down, they shut down. We need decentralisation, and unfortunately even if Brave is successful its still 1 company and not enough decentralization.

 

[webkit]

So yeah, I see what they did there and I have to agree with them. But I do not think Google pays them a penny. They tear Google all day long about privacy meanwhile Mozilla and Firefox tread lightly, and DDG do not dare to even mention Microsoft as they their business "partners".

I'm not sure if Google was/is paying Brave or not but given Brave's small usage it wouldn't be nearly as much as what browsers like Safari (especially!) and Firefox receive. Apple has also criticized Google over privacy matters despite being paid many billions over the years to push Safari users to Google search.

 

[I7guy]

I'm not sure if Google was/is paying Brave or not but given Brave's small usage it wouldn't be nearly as much as what browsers like Safari (especially!) and Firefox receive. Apple has also criticized Google over privacy matters despite being paid many billions over the years to push Safari users to Google search.

Sure apple criticizing google is fair even while being paid billions to set the default to google, which many users, imo, would do anyway.

 

[webkit]

Sure apple criticizing google is fair even while being paid billions to set the default to google, which many users, imo, would do anyway.

Apple is doing one thing (essentially endorsing use of Google by making it the default search and helping them gain or maintain dominant market share) while saying another (opposing privacy, tracking, etc. activities used by Google). It would be kind of like PETA getting paid by Tyson Foods to sponsor their conventions.

If Apple really cares about privacy, tracking, etc., they should've used actions here (not make/keep Google as the default) instead of just words. A great way for Apple to have SHOWN that they oppose Google's privacy, tracking, etc. policies (if they truly do) would've been to end the Google default search contract. Depending on how the DOJ v. Google case turns out, the government may end up ending the contract for them. At least the U.S. portion.

 

[I7guy]

Apple is doing one thing (essentially endorsing use of Google by making it the default search and helping them gain or maintain dominant market share) while saying another (opposing privacy, tracking, etc. activities used by Google). It would be kind of like PETA getting paid by Tyson Foods to sponsor their conventions.

Sure we can debate whether or not apples past criticisms of google are valid or not. The $$$ wont change that.

If Apple really cares about privacy, tracking, etc., they should've used actions here (not make/keep Google as the default) instead of just words.

The internet doesn’t care about $$$. Bits and bytes don’t change here because of $$$. Starting a premise with “if” is t the best debating technique.

A great way for Apple to have SHOWN that they oppose Google's privacy, tracking, etc. policies (if they truly do) would've been to end the Google default search contract.

And I’ll add to that. Don’t offer google as even an option. Remove google apps from the App Store. Don’t allow www dot google dot com in any browser. If apple really cared about privacy they would do just this.

Depending on how the DOJ v. Google case turns out, the government may end up ending the contract for them. At least the U.S. portion.

Or not.

 

[compwiz1202]

And I’ll add to that. Don’t offer google as even an option. Remove google apps from the App Store. Don’t allow www dot google dot com in any browser. If apple really cared about privacy they would do just this.

Wasn't there something about Apple asking about defaults when you set up? or was that someone else?

 

[compwiz1202]

I mostly like Google but maybe if there was no default, I would have tried something else. The only thing I like better about Bing is searching for simple things that come up on the search page wthout needing to go anywhere else. Tracking #s Movie Times etc...

 

[I7guy]

Wasn't there something about Apple asking about defaults when you set up? or was that someone else?

I can’t remember, honestly.

 

[MacBH928]

I'm not sure if Google was/is paying Brave or not but given Brave's small usage it wouldn't be nearly as much as what browsers like Safari (especially!) and Firefox receive. Apple has also criticized Google over privacy matters despite being paid many billions over the years to push Safari users to Google search.

There is a difference. Its the negotiation card. Apple could set DDG as the default search engine and not lose 1 customer. They can make fun of Google all day long.

DDG is reliant on Bing. If Microsoft gets upset with them, withdraw, DDG dies. Firefox only source of income is Google default payment. Google withdraws that Mozilla shuts down.

If Google just as much upsets Apple, Apple could buyout something like Brave Search or Mojeek and set it up as the default search engine and Google would be in bigger trouble then. less users -> Stock price down -> CEO fired.

Apple is doing one thing (essentially endorsing use of Google by making it the default search and helping them gain or maintain dominant market share) while saying another (opposing privacy, tracking, etc. activities used by Google). It would be kind of like PETA getting paid by Tyson Foods to sponsor their conventions.

If Apple really cares about privacy, tracking, etc., they should've used actions here (not make/keep Google as the default) instead of just words. A great way for Apple to have SHOWN that they oppose Google's privacy, tracking, etc. policies (if they truly do) would've been to end the Google default search contract. Depending on how the DOJ v. Google case turns out, the government may end up ending the contract for them. At least the U.S. portion.

Apple does not care about privacy. Apple business model relies on selling hardware+software. Google doesn't sell much, they really on data collection and advertising. Apple found itself in the position to use the privacy card to win customers so it used it against Android, Google Drive, App Store, and Chrome.

When Google was paying Apple $8-12B to be default search engine, Apple welcomed them with wide arms.

Companies that care about privacy like Tor Network , Proton, Mullvad, Debian, or FSF would never do that kind of agreement with Google.

 

[webkit]

And I’ll add to that. Don’t offer google as even an option. Remove google apps from the App Store. Don’t allow www dot google dot com in any browser. If apple really cared about privacy they would do just this.

Making Google apps available or giving access to Google is not as bad as essentially endorsing use of Google search by making it the default.

 

[webkit]

There is a difference. Its the negotiation card. Apple could set DDG as the default search engine and not lose 1 customer. They can make fun of Google all day long.

DDG is reliant on Bing. If Microsoft gets upset with them, withdraw, DDG dies. Firefox only source of income is Google default payment. Google withdraws that Mozilla shuts down.

If Google just as much upsets Apple, Apple could buyout something like Brave Search or Mojeek and set it up as the default search engine and Google would be in bigger trouble then. less users -> Stock price down -> CEO fired.

Apple does not care about privacy. Apple business model relies on selling hardware+software. Google doesn't sell much, they really on data collection and advertising. Apple found itself in the position to use the privacy card to win customers so it used it against Android, Google Drive, App Store, and Chrome.

When Google was paying Apple $8-12B to be default search engine, Apple welcomed them with wide arms.

Companies that care about privacy like Tor Network , Proton, Mullvad, Debian, or FSF would never do that kind of agreement with Google.

This is not a concern about Apple losing customers. It's about them not taking a stand and true action against business practices used by Google which Apple claims to be opposed to. Instead, they are endorsing it and making significant money off of it, and have been for years.

Apple is either lying to or misleading customers (if they don’t truly oppose privacy, tracking, etc. practices used by Google) or are hypocrites.

 

[I7guy]

This is not a concern about Apple losing customers. It's about them not taking a stand and true action against business practices used by Google which Apple claims to be opposed to. Instead, they are endorsing it and making significant money off of it, and have been for years.

It’s fair game for apple to criticize google. It’s fair game to criticize apple. It doesn’t mean there will be agreement about any or all of it. It’s okay for google to give apple $$$, until it’s not.

Apple is either lying to or misleading customers (if they don’t truly oppose privacy, tracking, etc. practices used by Google) or are hypocrites.

The internet doesn’t change because google gave apple money. Whether google gives allle .01 or 14b the internet doesn’t change. People can make their default searches what they want them to be. They can type in www dot google dot com at the browser.