5 ms·

Isn't that exactly what Google has to do to be the default search provider for IOS?

close04 7y ago
Why not ask Google to do exactly what MS was asked to do with the browsers for Windows: offer a spot on the choice screen for free, with Google search engine occupying a random position on the screen. I don't think any of the browser developers were asked to bid for a spot on the choice screen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu
- outside1234 7y ago
  I don't understand the downvotes. We are clearly at the same point with Google Search that we were with Windows at that time.
  - jbob2000 7y ago
    The difference is that there were only a few browsers back then, it was easy to list them on a screen. There are tons of search engines out there, how do you decide which ones to show above the fold on a user’s tiny screen?
    - close04 7y ago
      The browser choice screen included over time ~17 browsers. On the main page you had the main browsers, while the smaller ones ended up under a "More" button. And the "tiny screen" doesn't seem to be an issue when picking one of the dozens of languages during the phone's setup. Or any of the countless activities on a phone that overflow one screen. This particular list shouldn't be treated differently unless it's purely a money grab.
      - whalabi 7y ago
        It's also a barrier of entry to non profit search engines
        close04 7y ago
        It's a barrier for any search engine and Google knows it. Google is the only participant who doesn't have to pay and they're leveraging their 90% of the market share (about the same IE had 15 years ago) to squeeze the others. My question still stands and (downvotes and the "small screen" non-issue aside) nobody is able to explain why Google should get a different treatment from Microsoft given the similar position.
numbsafari 7y ago
The difference is that Apple doesn't have its own search engine getting a free slot. If Google handed administration of the auction over to an independent third party, who would accept all of the paid-in fees from the winners, thus bearing the same cost as everyone else, then it would be a lot harder to make a case against this arrangement.

Why not ask Google to do exactly what MS was asked to do with the browsers for Windows: offer a spot on the choice screen for free, with Google search engine occupying a random position on the screen. I don't think any of the browser developers were asked to bid for a spot on the choice screen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu

outside1234 7y ago
I don't understand the downvotes. We are clearly at the same point with Google Search that we were with Windows at that time.
- jbob2000 7y ago
  The difference is that there were only a few browsers back then, it was easy to list them on a screen. There are tons of search engines out there, how do you decide which ones to show above the fold on a user’s tiny screen?
  - close04 7y ago
    The browser choice screen included over time ~17 browsers. On the main page you had the main browsers, while the smaller ones ended up under a "More" button. And the "tiny screen" doesn't seem to be an issue when picking one of the dozens of languages during the phone's setup. Or any of the countless activities on a phone that overflow one screen. This particular list shouldn't be treated differently unless it's purely a money grab.
    - whalabi 7y ago
      It's also a barrier of entry to non profit search engines
      - close04 7y ago
        It's a barrier for any search engine and Google knows it. Google is the only participant who doesn't have to pay and they're leveraging their 90% of the market share (about the same IE had 15 years ago) to squeeze the others. My question still stands and (downvotes and the "small screen" non-issue aside) nobody is able to explain why Google should get a different treatment from Microsoft given the similar position.

numbsafari 7y ago

The difference is that Apple doesn't have its own search engine getting a free slot. If Google handed administration of the auction over to an independent third party, who would accept all of the paid-in fees from the winners, thus bearing the same cost as everyone else, then it would be a lot harder to make a case against this arrangement.