• @Goronmon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    765 months ago

    So, Google is clearly paying lots of money directly to maintain their lead in the search engine market.

    Bad look for Apple as well. They say they take privacy seriously, but are selling their user’s data to Google, one of the last companies you would want getting your information if you were concerned about privacy.

    • @KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      285 months ago

      They say they take privacy seriously, but are selling their user’s data to Google

      Only idiots think Apple is privacy friendly lol.

      I don’t link to news sites, but if you look up Apple Let Contractors Listen To Private Voice Recordings you’ll see that in 2019 they were sending voice clips to contractors.

      Apple has everyone fooled. They act like they are so privacy focused because they do processing locally on your device instead of in the cloud, which means nothing. Google also has been moving a vast majority of things to local processing on their Pixel devices for years now. Is Google now privacy focused?

      • HMN
        link
        fedilink
        English
        165 months ago

        Only idiots think Apple is privacy friendly lol.

        Apple has everyone fooled.

        Apple are privacy-focused insofar as they will privately sell your data, sneakily.

        • @interceder270@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          65 months ago

          They had a big billboard in LA that said “Apple knows privacy” or some shit.

          I guarantee all of them ate that up without a second thought.

      • @k2helix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        45 months ago

        Aren’t almost all (at least photo editing ones) new Pixel 8 & Pixel 8 Pro features in the cloud? What things do you mean when you say Google is moving to local processing?

    • body_by_make
      link
      fedilink
      English
      195 months ago

      Selling their user data to Google? They’re putting Google as the default search engine, but users are free to change it. I don’t understand how that’s the same. People would probably set it to Google anyway these days, which is a shame because Kagi is the best search engine.

        • @Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          55 months ago

          I’d prefer something more secure but all of them just suck. I use DDG but more than half the time I end up needing to use !g to get the google results because DDG just isn’t that good.

          • GigglyBobble
            link
            fedilink
            55 months ago

            I really wonder how people making such claims use it. I’m a dev and have to search daily and constantly and hardly ever don’t I find something and when I don’t, the Google bang doesn’t help either.

            But maybe DDG just works well for technical stuff.?

          • @insomniac@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            DDG is also a for profit venture and uses privacy more as a marketing ploy. They’ve been caught allowing Microsoft trackers.

            • GigglyBobble
              link
              fedilink
              25 months ago

              That was their browser though and you shouldn’t use a Chromium based browser anyway if you value privacy (and the future of the web for that matter).

          • The Octonaut
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -25 months ago

            They are receiving billions so that their users use Google search - why is this a question?

          • @agame@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 months ago

            Just arbitrarily mentioning kagi is the best when there are tons of better options.

            • Kayn
              link
              fedilink
              English
              04 months ago

              Are there any other options for paid ad-free search engines besides Brave Search?

    • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      135 months ago

      IOS is closed source and doesn’t allow side loading, it shouldn’t be considered in privacy discussions

    • @OR3X@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      My guy, there are plenty worse companies than Google to have your data. Let’s not get too hyperbolic.

      • @milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        Nah, there’s only one Apple user, she just posts a lot online under pseudonyms and buys a continuous stream of products.

  • @LetMeEatCake@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    475 months ago

    Paying over a third of all revenue generated from searches on Apple’s platform. That’s incredible. Not a lawyer so I have no idea how this will work out legally, but I have a hard time parsing such an enormous pay-share as anything other than an aggressive attempt to stymie competition. Flat dollar payments are easier to read as less damning, but willingly giving up that much revenue from the source suggests the revenue of the source is no longer the primary target. It’s the competitive advantage of keeping (potential) competitors from accessing that source.

    • @realharo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      125 months ago

      I mean, 30% is what Apple charges for regular apps and all in-app purchases/subscriptions too.

      • @Ape550@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        55 months ago

        It’s also a pretty standard margin for most retail stores as well. 30-40% at that scale isn’t surprising at all.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    85 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    For the DOJ—which has made the Google-Apple deal the center of its case alleging that Google maintains an illegal monopoly over search—this detail confirms how valuable default placements on iPhones are to the search leader.

    Previously, sources told The New York Times that Google paid Apple approximately $18 billion in 2021 for the deal, but the exact amount of revenue sharing remained unknown until Monday.

    The DOJ’s trial also recently revealed that Google paid $26 billion in total for default contracts, which are ostensibly responsible for driving up its search advertising revenue that is right now rapidly climbing.

    In total, across all those default deals, Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint estimated in a post on X that it’s possible that Google derives “at least $90 billion of its current annual revenue.”

    "We’re continuing to focus on making AI more helpful for everyone; there’s exciting progress and lots more to come,” Pichai said in a statement reported by Search Engine Land.

    Judge Amit Mehta, presiding over the antitrust trial, has said that the Google-Apple default deal is the “heart” of the DOJ’s case against Google.


    The original article contains 716 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • @jay9@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      235 months ago

      This summary literally strips out the most important part 😂

      Google’s default search deal with Apple is worth so much to the search giant that Google pays 36 percent of its search advertising revenue from Safari to keep its search engine set as the default in Apple’s browser, Bloomberg reported.

        • @jay9@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          55 months ago

          “36% cut of safari deal”

          is very different to

          “Google pays 36 percent of its search advertising revenue from Safari to keep its search engine set as the default in Apple’s browser”

          The former implies some sort of fixed cost arrangement.

          The latter implies a revenue share based on traffic and volume of advertising. It could even include all search revenue for ads displayed in Safari via Google owned ad networks - even if the ad placement did not originate from a google search.