You call helping Google earn billions of dollars in ad revenue executing them? If that's the case I hope Apple executes me as well; I could use the money.
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.
Tim Cook: 'We Don't Buy' the Need to Give Up Privacy for AI
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You call helping Google earn billions of dollars in ad revenue executing them? If that's the case I hope Apple executes me as well; I could use the money.
Get real, it has to be done legally without inconveniencing users. No benefit nuking Google if your users are the collateral damage. See this interesting piece from one of the best in depth journalist on Apple, Daniel Dilger. Look at how they can introduce adblockers that can hook right into iOS, that must hurt Google, irrelevant to Apple and improves the user experience, not only that but it forces Google to chop of their own hand because they have to allow the same type of blockers on Android, or maybe they don't I'm only assuming they do.
Edit: it appears not so easy to install quality adblockers on Android.
Last edited:
I still don't understand your logic - Apple is collecting $1B/year from Google as part of their sharing of ad revenue yet you seem to believe Apple's cover story about how they want to protect their users' privacy or how it makes Apple any different from Google.
Google wouldn't allow ad-blockers into their Play Store but changed their mind once Samsung forced the issue - Samsung co-sponsored one for their Galaxy browsers. Another option is Opera for Android, which has a built-in ad blocker that works very well.
What do you think Apple should have done, remove the possibility of Google search engine being available in the url bar, that would be treating it's users like children you cannot get away from the fact that Google is a pretty good search engine as far as the search engine goes. But google wants everyone to use google stuff so they can collect maximum data. How easy would it have been for Apple to keep the excellent Google maps, Apple maps is a big big investment and it also does serious harm to Google, plus they did a nicer job as far as the most important features and look goes. Little by little Apple are chipping away. And the reason they and no one else can do this is the total control of software and hardware and not needing to sell ads, which they soon realised was a mistake to even try.
Apple could have made a different search engine the default, ie require Google to be an opt-in rather than an opt-out. Otherwise Apple could have disclosed to users how they earn revenue from Google from the ads Google displays that are culled from users' privacy and search habits. If it weren't for the fact that Tim Cook spoke out so forcefully against Google's privacy-culling business model I wouldn't have had a problem with Apple's arrangement. It's Apple's blatant hypocrisy that's really the issue here. If you're going to say you protect your users' privacy then don't make back-room deals for billions of dollars that are earned by violating users' privacy.
Why do they need to disclose that they make money for putting google search at the top. It's the best search engine, as I said Apple aren't and don't want to be seen as churlish, especially under the reign of Cook. Bing is good enough for Siri that doesn't really need over elaborate, arcane and obscure searches, but if Bing say was the equivalent to Google, I'm sure they'd have Bing as the default and be happy to forgo the billions bucks, I can't prove that of course but the point is that users want Google, I nixed it as my default search in Safari and used google by going to it manually when I needed it, but I soon put it back. It's not hypocrisy, hypocrisy would be if they said Google was absolute rubbish at search but then accepted money to put it as the default. It's not a back room deal, really you're just trying to prove something that won't stand up. It's not like they paid Google through a shelf company.
In fact if they did a deal to have Bing as the default url search engine then you could accuse them of hypocrisy because they claim to want the user to have the best experience but they'd take money to put an inferior search engine as default. It's really money for nothing as they'd still put Google as the default anyway so users get the best search by default, but they put all the others there including Ducky, I'm sure you won't find Duck Duck as a choice in Android. I could be wrong though.
Wow...over the top much?
Google is absolutely THE dominant search engine. If apple had chosen to go with Duck Duck Go, Apple would be crucified with criticism and support calls asking how to change it to Google.
I would only criticize Apple if they made Google the ONLY search engine option in iOS. But they don't do this. Apple really does deserve to be applauded for their privacy protections.
