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.
Google Allegedly Pays Apple Portion of Chrome Search Revenue as Part of Secretive Non-Compete Deal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is usually how these things go. Corporations don’t intervene on their own good will.
I do not think so as they have lulled the user into a false sense of safety and privacy.
If you have a Google Account, your iPhone is basically Google in an Apple wrapper
Unless…. It’s also money to stop them from re-releasing Safari on Windows again.
There was a time that that was a thing, but it’s been many many years now.
If building a search engine is anything like building a digital assistant, how is Google really worried that Apple might actually compete with them? 🤣
Another keyboard warrior who doesn’t understand why we have laws to control these sorts of deals.Another stupid waste of time. Breaking news. Two businesses have a business deal that benefits both.
Last edited:
If Alphabet hasn't been targeted for making Google the default on Chrome or Microsoft for making Bing the default on their Edge browser, then Apple won't be targeted.
Commercial benefits.
Well that's a good reason to not invest in Safari unless it becomes EVIDENT, isn't it?
I would like to link a MR article, one year ago precisely: Safari Team Asks for Feedback Amid Accusations That 'Safari Is the Worst, It's the New IE'.
Safari last year really touched the bottom and suddenly Apple invested in WebKit/Safari team: do you remember open jobs everywhere for Safari WebKit engineers? If you follow the WebKit team engineers on Twitter you know.
Beside the engine capabilities, I guess this is a good reason to leave Safari crippled, hiding the fact behind its simplicity. Maybe also the reason why Safari doesn't add multiple profiles which Chrome literally had for years?
I have not enjoyed Safari anymore since long time now and this is the mirror of what it is.
People switching in mass and calling it the new internet explorer happens for a reason.
On the other hand, I have to say that it improved a lot in the last year, criticism worked and of course it's what I hope will continue to happen, Safari is so important for apple devices and in a world of chromium.
Written, unfortunately, using Google Chrome.
Well that's a good reason to not invest in Safari unless it becomes EVIDENT, isn't it?
I would like to link a MR article, one year ago precisely: Safari Team Asks for Feedback Amid Accusations That 'Safari Is the Worst, It's the New IE'.
Safari last year really touched the bottom and suddenly Apple invested in WebKit/Safari team: do you remember open jobs everywhere for Safari WebKit engineers? If you follow the WebKit team engineers on Twitter you know.
Beside the engine capabilities, I guess this is a good reason to leave Safari crippled, hiding the fact behind its simplicity. Maybe also the reason why Safari doesn't add multiple profiles which Chrome literally had for years?
I have not enjoyed Safari anymore since long time now and this is the mirror of what it is.
People switching in mass and calling it the new internet explorer happens for a reason.
On the other hand, I have to say that it improved a lot in the last year, criticism worked and of course it's what I hope will continue to happen, Safari is so important for apple devices and in a world of chromium.
Written, unfortunately, using Google Chrome.
Last edited:
For me, Chromium-based Edge offers the best combination of extension/site compatibility and resource usage.
Respect. Tim is really getting to the bag. I see why Berkshire made that move, definitely making some portfolio changes today. The versatility of the iPhone as a product will continue to diversify the ways Apple bring in revenue.
Yes, and that speaks to the hypocrisy. Apple/Cook have criticized Google’s privacy and tracking policies but them turn around and make significant money from it.
On top of that, there are the legal/antitrust issues such as an (alleged) agreement to limit competition thereby helping another company maintain its dominance or monopoly.
I think Safari is a more than credible challenger to Chrome, in Safari I get 12 hours battery life, using Chrome with 5 tabs I get like 6-7 hours.
Not the same thing. The antitrust/legal issue here is related to a agreement between two different companies (Apple and Google) that allegedly helps one of them (Google) maintain its dominance or monopoly. These types of agreements can be a violation of antitrust laws.
That's a lotta lettuce for me to just switch it to Duckduckgo
I will sometimes use Google for the odd search but 99.9% of the time DDG does the job without all the tracking and ads.
I will sometimes use Google for the odd search but 99.9% of the time DDG does the job without all the tracking and ads.
I think you meant, when Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe all had to pay fines for this due to a lawsuit settlement in 2015. Not just Apple.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-lawsuit-over-poaching-idUSKBN0KN02Z20150114
DuckDuckGo every day, all the way.
Everyone uses Google although it's so bad and antiprivacy. We should all be using a Siri based search engine from Apple.
I'm not stupid enough to think Apple cares about me. Like I always say, they're a business. Their sole purpose is to make as much money as possible. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
You're right. I'm totally hurt by the fact I have to spend 10 seconds of my life to change my default browser. The pain. The struggle. Life is so hard now.
You know DDG is heavily reliant on Microsoft Bing though, right? I mean it’s just pulling from APIs for it’s bangs and widgets, but majority of the links are still Bing and Oath/Yahoo which switched to Bing years ago. DDG is a great middleman helping out, but I just don’t want people thinking they built their own fully-fledged Google/Bing crawler and are competing on that level.
“Apple and Google are seeking a dismissal for the case on account of lack of evidence of a horizontal agreement between the two companies”
That’s a fancy way of saying they’re in bed together
That’s a fancy way of saying they’re in bed together