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 and Apple's Search Engine Deal Violates Antitrust Law
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Imagine what this means to Mozilla... bye bye Firefox
That will depend on how the ruling and remedy ultimately play out. Will ALL browser default search agreements be blocked or only those where the search engine has above a certain percentage of the market? Bing, for example, only has around 7% to 8% of the search market in the U.S. Would Microsoft be allowed to have a default agreement with Firefox? It wouldn’t likely pay as much as Google's but at least it would be something.
You say that as if Apple can just spin up a good search engine. If that was the case why does Apple Intelligence even need ChatGPT?
Now THIS was truly anticompetitive and good news for the consumer. Probably too late for a lot of competitors, but better late than never. The good news is Google doesn't need any help anymore and they will save a LOT of money and no one is going to feel sorry for Apple for losing this easy money.
DDG has been many people's preference for a while. IMO one of the biggest reasons people continue to use Google is that it's the default option...
Not exactly "nothing" as Apple still had to continue to spend money on Safari to make it a viable browser which enough people would use in order to justify Google's HUGE payment to be the default search.
IMO it's the exact opposite. 'AI' is just buzz word for 'doing a web search'. Computers do not think. They search databases for stuff based on algorithm.
Example... spell algorithm as 'algorythm'. Can Apple's built-in AI tell what word you're trying to spell and correct it? Nooo, because it's basic. Whereas a brain can look at it and be like 'that's a pretty obvious typo'
Last edited:
It won't be easy to plug that 20 billion dollar hole in the income statement. I'm just pointing out, that an Apple search engine with ads would be one way to do it.
Even among my tech friends who know for sure how to switch search engines, almost nobody uses it. I tried it for a while, but ended up having to !g so often that it wasn’t worth it.
Not going to happen. This was actual anti-competitive behavior, nothing Apple is doing in any way anti-competitive, nor is Apple in any way a monopoly. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple's case gets dismissed.
Apple can’t even add search to iCloud.com. I can’t imagine an Apple search engine.
I hear you but it all depends upon how you define the “relevant geographic market.”
I notice you didn’t mention the App Store itself as a category, as it pertains to iPhone and iPad.
And as we now know from Europe, alternative app stores can exist on iPhone.
In the USA there is no alternative App Store nor alternative payment processors on iPhone/ipad. You can’t even use an alternative web rendering engine to WebKit in the USA. Apple doesn’t lock down the Mac but yet it locks down iPad which uses the same exact Macintosh chips. Why?
By being the sole App Store operator and payment processor Apple is guaranteed a cut of App revenue. It can dictate terms and conditions and set prices that may not be the result of competition. In other words, pricing (the cut that App Store operator charges) on alternative app stores could potentially be lower than what Apple charges. Also, by being the sole operator of an App Store, Apple gets to dictate what apps are accepted or rejected. In other words, Apple gets to potentially restrict legal trade. Say an app developer wanted to sell a WiFi explorer app and there are willing buyers of such an app and nothing illegal about such an app. By rejecting such an app from the App Store, Apple is restricting otherwise legal trade. And that’s why government is getting involved. And if you look in the App Store there is no WiFi explorer app even though the phones can snoop available SSIDs and their respective rssi levels.
Sure you can say well just use android. But iPhone is no longer a new nascent platform. It is used by millions of people who depend upon it for communications, messaging, photos, and more. That is why the government is involved.
So if the relevant geographic market was defined as “the iOS/ipadOS App Store in the USA, as it pertains to iOS/iPadOS users” is Apple maintaining a monopoly? And if so, is that illegal ? An increasing number of countries around the world seem to think so. So I think it’s just a matter of time before Apple opens up and offers alternative app stores and/or payment processing in the USA.
Last edited:
Too late for them. This should have been taken up a long time ago. But better late than never.Imagine what this means to Mozilla... bye bye Firefox
As far as I can tell, Brave Search uses its own web index with about 8% of its search results sourced from Bing and Google. DDG, on the other hand, gets none of its results from Google.
I suppose a clever argument could convince me, but at first glance, I don’t think any of these arrangements violate antitrust law. A couple things to keep in mind, this is a prosecution of Google and won’t blanket anyone else’s business practices. Although might bolster the FTC and DOJ in prosecution of civil and criminal cases. And a monopoly isn’t always unlawful.
Interesting, how experiences vary. I have been using DDG as my default for years, and very rarely have to switch to Google to find what I'm looking for.
I love the exclamation mark shortcuts by the way and use them extensively. DDG (Apple) maps are also really good in my experience.
On Firefox I’m using smart keywords for that, which have the additional advantage that they don’t require the exlamation mark as a prefix.
Last edited:
I always thought it was exactly this.
Especially in the early days when it wasn't so clear that apple is uh; not good at online services. Apple throwing their hat into the ring as a search provider would cost google a lot more than a "measly" 20b.
Ah great, Guess Apple TV+ and iCloud+ are going up in cost now.
I use those too. You can set them up in the preferences as well. But sometimes the prefix is more convenient.
It would be nice for this to trigger a settings change to allow any search engine, rather than the short list in settings. Add Brave, Kagi, etc. Kagi uses a Safari Extension currently, which is hit or miss, so they built Orion browser. Then for Brave you need to, well, use Brave browser.
So if Apple develops their own search engine and installs it as the default, will that also violate anti-trust laws? If so, what would be the incentive for Apple to develop one in the first place? All this seems to be doing is making more work for the end user. I suspect that iPhones will include a choice upon setup and as many have already said, I bet most people will stick with Google (unless Apple drops it far down on a list)
Keep that in mind when iPhones see a 200-500 dollar markup this year or next. First the EU now this. Apple will not lose a dime so the money will come from the customers. iCloud price hike, device price hike, Apple TV ads and price hike, services price hike. But hey now you will get nagged to pick your search engine default so 99% of users can pick Google anyways. Yes, this is wonderful news for consumers.
If Apple develops a search engine? I can't wait for that subscription cost. Let's not forget Google if free because you are the product. Apple will make you pay for.... privacy.... or something.