Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

sammobile.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 748 posts

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#191

Post by morkalork »

SquareWheel wrote: post #91
lightbendover wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last thing anyone should ever want from a search engine is different results from the next person over.

That might be true in concept, but I don't think it's true in reality. When people search for something online, they want the first result to be whatever they had in mind. If I search for Python, I want the homepage for the programming language. When somebody else searches for Python, they might be looking to learn about the animal. You could argue that we should just ask for exactly what we want, but that puts more…

What about a child who used to be interested in reptiles but is now interested in programming? I get frustrated when Google starts acting "smart" and changing queries or hiding results. I've started to use Bing image search because I'd like more than 20 results, the way Google used to be. If they start acting like that even more, I'll use them even less!

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#192

Post by tough »

dathinab wrote: post #107

Soon we have a Microsoft more power full then ever but less controlled and constrained by anti monopoly regulation then ever. - after google search degraded for a while bing is competive - MS has much influence and stack in (not really open) OpenAI - MS has with LinkedLn a relevant social network, sure it's work focused but increasingly used for non work usecases - MS controls 2 of the 6 relevant gaming platforms (XB…

From my list of my daily usage offenders which also include VS Code, you forgot Github and TypeScript I think.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#193

Post by lillecarl »

pjmlp wrote: post #83
PlutoIsAPlanet wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just buy Canonical or something Canonical doesn't really make any things that are considered part of a desktop OS. Ubuntu is just a package (and some argue a bad one) of things made by other people. There's very little value in the Linux desktop and I don't see that changing anytime soon. You're probably best re-inventing the wheel if you want a Windows competitor, like Google did with ChromeOS.

They surely do, its reason to fame is being the best distribution supporting OEM devices without religion regarding open source drivers.

They're using a package manager that a lot of people are comfortable with, they give away their packages without subscriptions and they work with some OEMs.

But in reality, the hardware support is in the kernel, so any distro with a more up2date kernel would fare at least as good. As for the software Canonical produces, I'm not great friends with anything. Snap is crap, Netplan is just a renderer to systemd-networkd or networkmanager, MAAS is a pile of garbage, Juju never caught on, upstart failed, Unity failed etc...

We're running a lot of Canonical at work and I'm not particularly impressed.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#194

Post by muyuu »

jimmar wrote: post #20

This sounds similar to Walmart saying they'll stop taking Visa. Samsung would be dumb not to at least threaten moving away from Google, even if they had no intention to change. It's a negotiating tactic, one that has more teeth in recent months because Google's competitors are finally showing a real challenge.

They'd only be moving away from Google search not GMS. In my recent experience, Google Search is mediocre at best and perhaps worse than Bing most of the time. So it's not a massive gamble.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#195

Post by arthurofbabylon »

As an advertiser, it occurs to me that google severely dropped the ball. I've been waiting to hand them money, but they refuse to be sufficiently organized to onboard new, non-megacorp advertisers.

At first glance that makes sense: prioritize onboarding large businesses with large budgets. With a second thought, this approach seems foolish: their ad network is an ecosystem, and the X00,000 businesses like mine that are excluded would be an enormous boost to ad bids, ad targeting, and ad quality – 3 of the 4 things that Google breathes (the fourth being traffic).

If google screwed this up, what else are they screwing up?

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#196

Post by tough »

Nephx wrote: post #190
dathinab wrote: post #107

Soon we have a Microsoft more power full then ever but less controlled and constrained by anti monopoly regulation then ever. - after google search degraded for a while bing is competive - MS has much influence and stack in (not really open) OpenAI - MS has with LinkedLn a relevant social network, sure it's work focused but increasingly used for non work usecases - MS controls 2 of the 6 relevant gaming platforms (XB…

And they've invested billions into the development-scene, especially lately. Noteworthy; - Github with its new Copilot API to multiple IDE's (incl. third party) - Typescript and standards management - NPM, locking into the entire web2 ecosystem

Oh damn, NPM too?

lol. MS owns my ass and I can't even do shit about it

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#197

Post by jwestbury »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #171
traveler01 wrote: post #127

Google constant failure astonish me. How a company with so much money, so many wonderful engineers can't produce a source of income other than the search engine? I kept reading news about Google's AI programs, how the hell was Microsoft with OpenAI that came up with the biggest hit in AI? Also, how does Google want people to use their new services if they keep closing them down after their "failure" (a.k.a Google com…

> so many wonderful engineers can't produce a source of income other than the search engine? I get the essence of the comment and agree somewhat, but also feel; There are plenty of other areas driving big revenue like adsense, youtube, play store, cloud and pixel. I dont feel its fair to compare revenue to these in the same level of search. Search was a true unicorn business and took over the world, there only so man…

Taking another approach: Google is proof that having great engineering doesn't matter without competent business leadership. For all their failures, this is where Amazon and Microsoft excel -- they both have incredibly talented businesspeople with long-term focus and a focus on delivering real value, rather than pursuing the latest fad passion project.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#198

Post by gsatic »

traveler01 wrote: post #127

Google constant failure astonish me. How a company with so much money, so many wonderful engineers can't produce a source of income other than the search engine? I kept reading news about Google's AI programs, how the hell was Microsoft with OpenAI that came up with the biggest hit in AI? Also, how does Google want people to use their new services if they keep closing them down after their "failure" (a.k.a Google com…

Google is not going anywhere and they will easily replicate anything OpenAI does. Its not that magical.

Why they still rely on search/advertising is well known - Replacing a 150 Billion $$$ source of revenue is not a simple thing.

Its like trying to replace everything ppl do in a midsized rich country with something else.

And compared to Facebook which is still 99% dependent on Ads, Google is much more diversified (total revenue is north of 250 billion). They have cloud, youtube, docs, google play, all the alphabet experiments etc. And most importantly half the worlds online advertising (exchanges/ auctions etc) uses Google ad tech. So Google is not going anywhere.

They just look at the world through a very different lens due to their size. I am guessing they dont see the point of keeping businesses that produce a few hundred million in revenue running, cause they really need businesses that produce a few hundred billion to keep all their free stuff (search, email, chat, chrome, android, video, r&d for other stuff etc) afloat.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#199

Post by asddubs »

PlutoIsAPlanet wrote: post #39
simula67 wrote: post #21

I always thought that Google made a big blunder by not encroaching upon Microsoft's turf more aggressively. They should have tried to make a better desktop OS (just buy Canonical or something) and then eat into Microsoft Office market share by releasing Google Office for Desktop. Wait for an opportunity to emerge and then pounce. This is precisely what Microsoft did to Google. They had Bing running in the background…

> just buy Canonical or something Canonical doesn't really make any things that are considered part of a desktop OS. Ubuntu is just a package (and some argue a bad one) of things made by other people. There's very little value in the Linux desktop and I don't see that changing anytime soon. You're probably best re-inventing the wheel if you want a Windows competitor, like Google did with ChromeOS.

A canonical engineer did fix a kernel bug that prevented my laptop from booting on newer kernel versions. And they do develop their own software, too. Saying that they are "just a package" is not giving them enough credit.

Re: Samsung considers moving to Bing as default search engine

#200

Post by zirgs »

muyuu wrote: post #143
gspencley wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of Android is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license. So while the word "owns" is true in a technical legal sense, there is nothing to prevent anyone from forking it and doing their own thing. Unlike with GPL code, they don't even need to license their changes under the same license as long as they abide the terms with respects to the original. Personally I use GrapheneOS in order to "de-Google" without switching…

I've been looking at it. Ironically, you needed a Google Pixel to run it last I checked, right?

Yup - Google made the best de-googleable phone.
Post reply on HN