Apple's U.S. iPhone User Base Overtook Android in June Quarter, Now Accounts for More Than Half of All Smartphones

[I7guy]

Obviously, it's both. Not switching defaults combined with Safari's 53% U.S. mobile browser share makes the Apple/Google agreement particularly significant and why Google is willing to pay Apple so much. Much more than, for example, they pay Mozilla.





It is not my "opinion." If you do a search for user behavior regarding default settings, you will find articles.





Again, I was referring to articles about user behavior regarding default settings. I assume you are capable of doing a search and finding articles on user behavior regarding default settings.





Yes, Apple is getting paid handsomely to send Safari traffic to Google. Google is not paying Apple that much because "not much would really change and apple might as well get paid for something that would happen anyway" (as you stated previously), they are paying Apple that much because it does have impact.





I assume you are capable of doing a search and finding articles on user behavior regarding default settings.





Again, that's reminder or image advertising which is not really the same thing as paying to be positioned as the default.





And Apple is absolutely selling something. They are selling the default search position on Safari to Google for billions per year. If "Apple isn't selling anything" (as you stated previously), then what is Google paying billions for?

So you want me to do your work and prove your citation by spending MY time?

More probable is that there isn't any relevant proof on the internet that is cogent enough to be able to prove your assumptions...which is:
- "Most" iphone consumers are tech illiterate and they don't change defaults
- google pays apple to get those tech illiterate consumers to give up their privacy and make money from them.
- Apple fails because they aren't privacy focused.

The reason why google pays apple is the same reason why coca-cola advertises during half-time. The above, which is your thinking is absurd at every level.

 

[ericwn]

Obviously, it's both. Not switching defaults combined with Safari's 53% U.S. mobile browser share makes the Apple/Google agreement particularly significant and why Google is willing to pay Apple so much. Much more than, for example, they pay Mozilla.





It is not my "opinion." If you do a search for user behavior regarding default settings, you will find articles.





Again, I was referring to articles about user behavior regarding default settings. I assume you are capable of doing a search and finding articles on user behavior regarding default settings.





Yes, Apple is getting paid handsomely to send Safari traffic to Google. Google is not paying Apple that much because "not much would really change and apple might as well get paid for something that would happen anyway" (as you stated previously), they are paying Apple that much because it does have impact.





I assume you are capable of doing a search and finding articles on user behavior regarding default settings.





Again, that's reminder or image advertising which is not really the same thing as paying to be positioned as the default.





And Apple is absolutely selling something. They are selling the default search position on Safari to Google for billions per year. If "Apple isn't selling anything" (as you stated previously), then what is Google paying billions for?

Well said. They cater to a mostly non technical audience and set the preferences willingly for the ad company. Case closed.

 

[webkit]

So you want me to do your work and prove your citation by spending MY time?

More probable is that there isn't any relevant proof on the internet that is cogent enough to be able to prove your assumptions...which is:
- "Most" iphone consumers are tech illiterate and they don't change defaults
- google pays apple to get those tech illiterate consumers to give up their privacy and make money from them.
- Apple fails because they aren't privacy focused.

The reason why google pays apple is the same reason why coca-cola advertises during half-time. The above, which is your thinking is absurd at every level.

No, I've done the "work" and have read articles. If you truly need help searching to find any articles about user behavior regarding default settings, let me know but they are pretty easy to find. Are you saying there are articles out here the state most people change their default settings?

Again, half time Super Bowl advertising is not the same thing as default settings but if you want to continue to believe that, does that mean you also believe a Super Bowl airing network "isn't selling anything" either?

 

[webkit]

Well said. They cater to a mostly non technical audience and set the preferences willingly for the ad company. Case closed.

In addition to selling the default search position on Safari, some have speculated (there's even legal actions) that Apple is also being paid by Google to not enter or to limit their entry into the search business which, if true, could be an antitrust violation. Choosing not to go into a particular business is one thing but being PAID by a dominant company in that business not to do so is potentially illegal for both Apple and Google. Unless explicitly spelled out in some sort of agreement, however, it may be difficult to prove.

Whether Google is paying Apple to be the default search position on Safari, to stay out of the search business, or both, Apple is actively (for significant money) helping Google to defend its search dominance which doesn't sit well with some people. The legality of the agreement/arrangement will likely continue to be questioned in public and in courts.

 

[I7guy]

No, I've done the "work" and have read articles. If you truly need help searching to find any articles about user behavior regarding default settings, let me know but they are pretty easy to find. Are you saying there are articles out here the state most people change their default settings?

Again, half time Super Bowl advertising is not the same thing as default settings but if you want to continue to believe that, does that mean you also believe a Super Bowl airing network "isn't selling anything" either?

So you’re basing this discussion on anecdotal evidence you can’t prove relative to this discussion?

At any rate this transfer of funds is happening regardless of anybody’s opinion.

But I do think coca-cola advertising in the half time is equivalent to what google is doing with apple. And that is making sure the brand has the maximum exposure.

 

[I7guy]

[…]. The legality of the agreement/arrangement will likely continue to be questioned in public and in courts.

Where is any legal action on this?

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Where is any legal action on this?

Google Basically Pays Apple to Stay Out of the Search Engine Business, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges

Apple has an agreement with Google that it won't develop its own internet search engine so long as Google pays it to remain the default option in...

www.macrumors.com

 

[I7guy]

Google Basically Pays Apple to Stay Out of the Search Engine Business, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges

Apple has an agreement with Google that it won't develop its own internet search engine so long as Google pays it to remain the default option in...

www.macrumors.com

Interesting. Filing a lawsuit to winning one is a big chasm.

Class action lawsuit alleges Google pays Apple to stay out of the search engine market - General Discussion Discussions on AppleInsider Forums

A class-action antitrust case has been filed that claims Apple and Google have violated U.S.

forums.appleinsider.com

 

[webkit]

So you’re basing this discussion on anecdotal evidence you can’t prove relative to this discussion?

At any rate this transfer of funds is happening regardless of anybody’s opinion.

There are articles out there which are easy to find. If you choose not look for them or believe them, that's up to you.

But I do think coca-cola advertising in the half time is equivalent to what google is doing with apple. And that is making sure the brand has the maximum exposure.

Paying to have an ad appear on television, online, etc. is different than paying to be the default on a device, app, etc. but I'm not going to continue to go around in circles with you on this.

Where is any legal action on this?

As has been pointed out above, there was a January MacRumors article about a lawsuit related to this. You even posted comments on it.

 

[I7guy]

There are articles out there which are easy to find. If you choose not look for them or believe them, that's up to you.

Correct. If you want to post a citation for what you assert you can feel free or else it's just an opinion.

Paying to have an ad appear on television, online, etc. is different than paying to be the default on a device, app, etc. but I'm not going to continue to go around in circles with you on this.

It's about brand awareness.

As has been pointed out above, there was a January MacRumors article about a lawsuit related to this. You even posted comments on it.

Yes, I acknowledged the lawsuit. I also acknowledged that lawsuits are easy to file and hard to win and that a lawsuit can be filed for any reason.

Unfortunately all these are assumptions without a source of integrity with some information on what iphone consumers do with the default search engine setting on iphone.

 

[Killjoy82]

Totally agree the only way you have privacy is a degokgled phine and Linux phone but by any means Google and iphone are tracking you through their gps and wifi pings how do people think air tags work. There is no privacy with apple and google and the government. You think people would have learned from Snowden.

not a fan of either Android or iOS. Both are not private in any way from US Gov agencies and departments and approved corporations. But iOS does have, at the moment, more protection against independent scammers than Android.