They’re not switching because they don’t care. How hard it is to tap the settings app and change the search engine?If most users don't switch it's not easy (and they don't)
They’re not switching because they don’t care. How hard it is to tap the settings app and change the search engine?If most users don't switch it's not easy (and they don't)
I know, I was responding to another comment, not the story itself.That's not what the case is about. It's about Google paying Apple to not develop a search engine.
iOS has a significant part of the mobile market and it’s the most lucrative part.$15 billion CANNOT be worth it to Google, can it!? How much are they bringing in from iOS and macOS traffic???
So where do companies which are publicly traded publish the details of their business contracts?
Can you point to some examples?
I believe they only had to file some of it to SEC and this requirement was reduced a lot in 2019.
I'm going to start a class action against Tesla and Taco Bell. If Taco Bell got into the electric car market, it'd cause Tesla to lower their prices. I'm sure Tesla is paying Taco Bell not to do so, thereby allowing them to maintain a premium on their vehicles.
Lol Google made 180 billion in 2020 in revenue, you think they are dumb to be negotiating deals that aren't worthwhile for them?$15 billion CANNOT be worth it to Google, can it!? How much are they bringing in from iOS and macOS traffic???
The issue is collusion to control a particular market. Agreements among competitors to divide sales territories or assign customers are almost always illegal. "I won't sell in your market if you don't sell in mine."If the other carpenter is happy with the deal then where's the issue exactly?
Google is paying Apple billions to be the default search engine on iOS because that means billions in ad revenue for them.You are "sure" Tesla is paying Taco Bell billions like Google is paying Apple?? What evidence do you have?
There is evidence that Google is paying Apple many billions of dollars. That question being raised here is what the true/entire purpose is behind those payments.
If the other carpenter is happy with the deal then where's the issue exactly?
That's a good point actually. I guess it's like the App Store - more people on iOS are likely to buy/spend money on apps than on Android. It just seems like a wild amount of money to spend on that kind of deal - and I can see why they're being investigated for it. But Apple is basically treating Google like a cash cow - which is funny to see tbf.iOS has a significant part of the mobile market and it’s the most lucrative part.
At no point did I even remotely suggest they were dumb for doing so. I was just really surprised at that number and wanted more information. In response to your comment: And they're paying around 8% of their revenue to Apple? I'd be interested to know how much of that 180 billion is brought in via Apple's ecosystem... I'm not sitting here saying I know better I'm just genuinely curious.Lol Google made 180 billion in 2020 in revenue, you think they are dumb to be negotiating deals that aren't worthwhile for them?
I'd really want a universe that had apple making success of their search engine without using user data
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 Safari, a new class action alleges.
Filed in a California court earlier this week against Apple, Google, and their respective CEOs, the lawsuit alleges the two companies have a non-compete agreement in the internet search business that violates US antitrust laws.
![]()
Specifically, the complaint charges Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai of participating in "regular secret meetings" in which Google agrees to share its profits with Apple if it is given preferential treatment on devices like the iPhone and iPad.
The class action also alleges that Google pays Apple annual multi-billion-dollar payments based on an agreement that Apple won't launch its own competing search engine, and that the non-compete agreement includes plans to actively suppress smaller competitors and acquire actual and potential competitors.
The complaint claims that advertising rates are subsequently higher than rates would be in a competitive system. It therefore seeks an injunction prohibiting the non-compete agreement between Google and Apple, a cessation of the profit-sharing agreement and preferential treatment, and an end to the multi-billion dollar payments.
Lastly, the complaint calls for "the breakup of Google into separate and independent companies and the breakup of Apple into separate and independent companies in accordance with the precedent of the breakup of Standard Oil company into Exxon, Mobile, Conoco, Amoco, Sohio, Chevron, and others."
It's no secret Apple and Google have a considerable monetary agreement that ensures Google's position as the default search engine on Apple devices. Neither company has ever confirmed exactly how much Google pays to be the default search engine on Apple devices in the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries, but it's rumored to be in the billions.
In 2020, The New York Times reported that Apple receives an estimated $8-12 billion per year in exchange for making Google the default search on its devices. According to one analyst, Google's payment to Apple in 2021 to maintain this status quo may have reached up to $15 billion.
This is believed to be the single biggest payment Google makes to anyone, and could account for up to a fifth of Apple's annual profits. But it has also drawn scrutiny in the past, in particular from the US Justice Department, which claims that the deal is representative of illegal tactics used to protect Google's monopoly and stifle competition.
The UK Competition and Markets Authority has also called the arrangement a "significant barrier to entry and expansion" for rivals in the search engine market, and in 2020 asked for enforcement authorities to be provided with a range of options to address the deal between Apple and Google to provide a more level playing field for other search engines.
Bringing the antitrust case to a San Francisco court this week, lawyer Joseph M Alioto said: "These powerful companies abused their size by unlawfully foreclosing and monopolizing major markets which in an otherwise free enterprise system would have created jobs, lowered prices, increased production, added new competitors, encouraged innovations, and increased the quality of services in the digital age."
Apple and Google would likely argue that while the payments are indeed for Google to remain the default search option, users can select other search engines in Safari including Microsoft's Bing, Verizon's Yahoo, and independent search engines DuckDuckGo and Ecosia.
Apple would also likely point out that it is already in the search engine business and maintains an active web crawler, called Applebot. The crawler chiefly operates in the background to improve Siri and Spotlight search results, although past reports have interpreted Applebot's increased activity as Apple "stepping up efforts" to develop its own search technology should its agreement with Google become incompatible with antitrust laws.
Article Link: Google Basically Pays Apple to Stay Out of the Search Engine Business, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges
Subscription.Building one as good as Google's is a monumental challenge. People will just make fun of Apple when its search results suck compared to Google's and the first thing techies recommend everyone to do is to change the default Apple search engine to Google.
Developing a search engine is also extremely costly. Since Apple's primary business isn't selling ads, it would be extremely hard for Apple to recuperate the cost. There is no other way to make money besides selling ads for a search engine.
In addition, if Apple made a search engine, lawyers would be targeting Apple for making its own search engine the default.
It's actually lose/lose for Apple to make a search engine.
Google is paying Apple billions to be the default search engine on iOS because that means billions in ad revenue for them.
You just need to learn how to use a search engine. Google finds everything there is including things posted on Internet a few minutes ago.I agree with most of this, except that I don’t actually think Google is good. It’s just that the alternatives aren’t better. Google is broken, I can’t find anything anymore, unless I wan’t to buy stuff, or am content with informational articles from the top five. The first two pages are paid links, the rest is less relevant, to make the paid links look more relevant. Actually relevant pages that are not paid, are close to invisible when you google.
you're so close to understanding the point.So Apple is now accused of antitrust violations for NOT developing a search engine, and NOT forcing people to use a particular search engine? Just making google the default, which can easily be changed? Is there anything in this day in age that is not considered antitrust from a large company?
I'm sorry. That must be a joke. No one is going to subscribe to an Apple search engine when a better one is free. Maybe you will. But Apple is not going to drop $50 billion building a search engine only for one person to pay $4.99/month for it.Subscription.
Exactly. Most people just don't know how to search. And you can learn to use advanced search parameters too.You just need to learn how to use a search engine. Google finds everything there is including things posted on Internet a few minutes ago.
No. Google is blocking Apple through money to let them compete against them. Imagine paying another carpenter in your city yearly for not working so you can have the entire market for yourself and charge whatever you want. Its gross capitalism and it needs to be stopped.
Correction for your analogy should be, “imagine paying a mason so you’re the default carpenter, and they don’t go into carpentry.” No the entire market, but default. Google is paying Apple to toggle a switch. How long would it take you to toggle it to Bing, or another ‘carpenter?’