Quoted post unavailable.
Startpage uses Google for it's results so I'm not sure if that qualifies as an alternative. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startpage.com
Bing/Google are used as a backend by many of these. Kind of worrying.
Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
141–150 of 388 posts
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
#5 is the key point to my mind. For example, you can’t just add new search engines to iOS Safari with just a URL. There are a few alternatives to Google but there’s no easy way for a new entrant to get in there. EDIT: Interesting. I’m picking up downvotes for this, is there some way to achieve this (other than jailbreaking) I’ve missed?
I did a search for it, and apparently the only way to add other search engines are through extensions. I haven't tested it though.
I am test driving Kagi and was very suprised to learn that on Firefox I appear to need a plugin/extension to add it as a default search engine.
Blew my mind. Maybe I am missing something.
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#143[deleted]
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#144”The complaint claims that the means used to effectuate the non-compete agreement included; (1) Google would share it's search profits with Apple; (2) Apple would give preferential treatment to Google for all Apple devices; (3) regular secret meetings between the executives of both companies; (4) annual multi-billion-dollar payments by Google to Apple not to compete in the search business; (5) suppression of the comp…
#5 is the key point to my mind. For example, you can’t just add new search engines to iOS Safari with just a URL. There are a few alternatives to Google but there’s no easy way for a new entrant to get in there. EDIT: Interesting. I’m picking up downvotes for this, is there some way to achieve this (other than jailbreaking) I’ve missed?
Fantastic and subtle ways to generic-ize API and competition.
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
#5 is the key point to my mind. For example, you can’t just add new search engines to iOS Safari with just a URL. There are a few alternatives to Google but there’s no easy way for a new entrant to get in there. EDIT: Interesting. I’m picking up downvotes for this, is there some way to achieve this (other than jailbreaking) I’ve missed?
I’m guessing the issue is because there isn’t a lot of merit in saying Apple and Google are totally stitched up when the options change by region and for the plaintiff there are at least 4 additional options other than Google. EG Ecosia is a recent entry, so it does seem that Apple does look into this and introduce new options that can serve their audience size with sufficient quality results. Getting included seems…
Most other search engines use Google under the hut anyway.. I'm wondering sind quite a whole, when Google will block them..
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Instant answers are provided by Apple, but when search answers are provided these are Google. Apple needs to still crawl to provide instant answers. Statement from Apple in 2017 when they switched to Google from Bing: > Switching to Google as the web search provider for Siri, Search within iOS and Spotlight on Mac will allow these services to have a consistent web search experience with the default in Safari. ( https…
Right, so when I type something into the Safari search bar on iOS, it gives me Apple-sourced suggestions from the web, even though I have "Search Engine Suggestions" turned off (because I don't want my URL typing history leaking to a search engine). That qualifies as "already in the search business" IMO.
> That qualifies as "already in the search business" IMO.
Well they are definitely in the search business anyway, as >20% of Apple's annual revenue is from search.
It's just that all the revenue apple makes from search comes directly from Google in the form of a $20bn payment, and Google powers almost all their actual web searches (i.e. not instant suggestions), so I think it's hardly an independent 'search business' and more of a 'search partnership with Google'.
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
#5 is the key point to my mind. For example, you can’t just add new search engines to iOS Safari with just a URL. There are a few alternatives to Google but there’s no easy way for a new entrant to get in there. EDIT: Interesting. I’m picking up downvotes for this, is there some way to achieve this (other than jailbreaking) I’ve missed?
I can't believe I've never considered this. They really should have a "custom" option in there as well. Is it possible to do using .mobileconfig profiles maybe? (Off topic: Is there a specification somewhere on what's possible using .mobileconfig profiles?)
It’s possible to do via extensions now. Hyperweb is an extension that allows for adding atmos search engines.
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is hard to believe that this payment is just for being the default search engine. I strongly suspect that Apple also agrees to not build their own search engine as long as this deal is on In practical terms, if Apple launched a search engine that wasn’t the default, would it see much uptake? It seems to me that Google don’t need an agreement for that.
This is Apple we’re talking about. That search engine would be a skunkworks project for several years and rapidly become the default soon after release. Presumably, what Google gets out of this is the assurance that no such skunkworks project exists.
I'm assuming the agreement would not cover skunkworks projects as this would be clearly deemed anti-competitive (collusion) if that deal ever saw the light of day. Even a deal of not launching a product might be deemed as such. But I assume you can't really launch a search engine without a couple of years of user feedback, i.e. tracking what links get clicked and which not, to influence the ranking. And that would require an official launch from Apple, which would probably result in Google to terminate the agreement immediately on launch (even if it is not made the default search engine). So even without written/verbal agreement in that field, Apple knows that the minute they publicly launch a search engine, the deal is off. I think such a deal would fall into the tacit collusion category [0].
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did a search for it, and apparently the only way to add other search engines are through extensions. I haven't tested it though.
I am test driving Kagi and was very suprised to learn that on Firefox I appear to need a plugin/extension to add it as a default search engine. Blew my mind. Maybe I am missing something.
That's not the case for me. Firefox 95.0.2 for Linux, using Kagi as my default, and I have neither a Kagi plugin nor an extension installed.
Re: Lawsuit filed alleging Google is paying Apple to stay out of the search business
#150The whole structure of antitrust regulation is, by negligence or design, weird and weak. #1 Why does there need to be a plaintiff? A trust affects consumers and society broadly detrimentally, not some specific competitor. The competitor google is likely trying to suppress is some theoretical startup anyway, they probably don't exist to sue. #2 Why the focus on specific damages? The specific harm of such a trust are i…
> Why does there need to be a plaintiff?
There doesn't need to be an independent plaintiff. The DoJ can bring an antitrust suit directly, and often does. For example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....