3 ms·
The gist of their rebuttal is that people choose them because they are superior. If that's the case then why the $26.3B to be the default? IANAL but I don't thi
by 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
The gist of their rebuttal is that people choose them because they are superior. If that's the case then why the $26.3B to be the default? IANAL but I don't think they've sufficiently answered this question.
- bad_user 3y agoBecause defaults matter for people that simply use what is given to them. Also, those payouts have addition benefits. Given the billions they give to Apple, I'm pretty sure that it prevents Apple from developing their own search engine, or from blocking ads in Safari by default. Same for Firefox. Google's Search is still the best, though. And I don't have any numbers, but I could bet that it's by far the most used search engine even on browsers that don't have it as a default (e.g., Vivaldi).
- VikingCoder 3y agoIANAL... but... isn't this Apple squeezing money out of Google? Blackmailing them that, if Google doesn't pay up, that Apple will give users a worse Search engine default, just out of spite? Apple has a walled garden. Isn't this Google paying to have their product billboard inside the wall? Why are we blaming Google for this?
- vb-8448 3y agoI think most people will just stick with the default option, very few people will change the search engine even if there is another one better. I remember the first years of chrome, people were using IE regardless of the fact that chrome was a superior browser. In general, I would prefer no default and the choice of the search engine be done by the user on the first access but, from the point of view of google, i think it's the best way for them to spend those moneys.