Apple develops alternative to Google search(ft.com)
ft.com
Apple develops alternative to Google search
https://www.ft.com/content/fd311801-e863-41fe-82cf-3d98c4c47e26
16 comments
"Siri suggested websites" has been part of safari for a long time. I actually find them more useful than Google, since it is quick to suggest wikipedia articles, while Google prefers to show their own cards instead of linking to the wikipedia source of those cards.
Annoyingly, Siri often suggests a wikipedia article from en.m.wikipedia.org, but send me to a dk.m.wikipedia.org page where the article doesn't exists.
So the suggest is good, but at the same time kinda useless.
Annoyingly, Siri often suggests a wikipedia article from en.m.wikipedia.org, but send me to a dk.m.wikipedia.org page where the article doesn't exists.
So the suggest is good, but at the same time kinda useless.
What the title says: "Apple has developed an alternative to Google Search".
What the content says: "Apple might be developing an alternative to Google Search".
When are mainstream, reputable outlets like FT going to realize that this kind of thing actively contributes to the "fake news" meme cycle? It's almost like they are trying to destroy their own reputations in pursuit of clicks.
What a shame.
What the content says: "Apple might be developing an alternative to Google Search".
When are mainstream, reputable outlets like FT going to realize that this kind of thing actively contributes to the "fake news" meme cycle? It's almost like they are trying to destroy their own reputations in pursuit of clicks.
What a shame.
I would like to see a discussion about how Siri Suggested Sites works. Say what you want about Google, but they should be admired for taking the high road on content development to support search. Their participation in schema.org, Wikipedia, and other knowledge resources leads to result that can be used at a low level by anyone. It's another matter that we should be concerned that only a few companies will have the capacity to build the brain to support all this creates, which is well beyond browsing the web, a web site like Amazon, or silo'd apps (though a really large and ultimately non-open site like Facebook could become its own world).
+1 totally agree. Support for schema.org, WikiData, etc. is useful, a rising tide that floats all boats.
I don't get why the general hn crowd is antipathic, at best about this topic (I often get downvoted making any semantic web type post). Intentionally making the web into a database usable by anyone is a wonderful idea that will have knock on benefits to every corner of humanity. I honestly think it's just too much disruption for a crowd very focused on making money from vertical disruption, that has given up on larger projects.
A search engine from a non-advertising-supported company is great news.
Google has dropped the ball when it comes to penalizing websites that provide a bad experience (paywalls/login walls, ads, SEO filler content, etc) which makes sense when you realize that Google's revenue depends on ads so that downranking websites with ads (the aforementioned bad behaviors are often combined with ads) would be counter-productive to its bottom-line.
Apple would not have that limitation, and would be free to downrank websites at will considering their revenue doesn't directly depend on those sites. At the same time, if this becomes the default search engine on iOS it will force websites to comply with Apple's demands unless they're happy to lose out on a large chunk of potential customers with money to spend (as they've already demonstrated by buying an iOS device instead of Android).
Google has dropped the ball when it comes to penalizing websites that provide a bad experience (paywalls/login walls, ads, SEO filler content, etc) which makes sense when you realize that Google's revenue depends on ads so that downranking websites with ads (the aforementioned bad behaviors are often combined with ads) would be counter-productive to its bottom-line.
Apple would not have that limitation, and would be free to downrank websites at will considering their revenue doesn't directly depend on those sites. At the same time, if this becomes the default search engine on iOS it will force websites to comply with Apple's demands unless they're happy to lose out on a large chunk of potential customers with money to spend (as they've already demonstrated by buying an iOS device instead of Android).
> A search engine from a non-advertising-supported company is great news.
Currently, Apple actually gets money from Google for selecting the latter as its default search engine. Not only Apple will lose that money but would also need to dump money in developing + maintaining the search engine.
May be their goal is to just provide a more privacy-sensitive search but I'm a bit cynical about that motivation. So, the economic model is still unclear to me.
Currently, Apple actually gets money from Google for selecting the latter as its default search engine. Not only Apple will lose that money but would also need to dump money in developing + maintaining the search engine.
May be their goal is to just provide a more privacy-sensitive search but I'm a bit cynical about that motivation. So, the economic model is still unclear to me.
Non-paywall alternative coverage:
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/28/apple-stepping-up-effor...
Do people even check stories they submit or do they assume people have subscriptions to these sites?
As per FAQ [1]
>Are paywalls ok?
It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds.
In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. More here.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
>Are paywalls ok?
It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds.
In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. More here.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
It's still shitty.
Paywall alternative?
Just google the article and click the link. It is not paywalled for visitors from Google
Ironic workaround. :)
What Apple is doing from Day 1, were to strategically squeeze as much money from Google, or from Android Ecosystem as possible.
First is Default Search Engine Placement Rent.
Then try to use privacy to limit the Data Google could collect. Decreasing the value they get per user.
Since Apple knows all the search queries, they can now place the Answer ( Siri ) directly into your Siri Suggestions or Answers from Wiki, Weather, Sports, TV, News etc without ever touching Google.
Limiting your exposure to the Web, and Ads directly lower Google revenue.
One unintended consequence is that Google tries to increase their revenue in the mist of all that, so they now have even more ads on the search results. Which harms the Web Experience, and more people are turning to Apps.
And when people search for Apps on App Store, Guess what Apple does? App Store placement and Ads. ( Genius! ... or not. )
$10 per user per year, roughly $10B per year is enough to fund Apple's Map and Ax Chip R&D for years. And it is the sole reason why Apple are putting out Services like Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Arcade and Apple News+. All of these are very low or nearly zero margin business. While App Store, Google's Payment are nearly 100% margin. ( Apple only book their 30% cut as their revenue before someone jump in with 70% being paid out as I have seen countless times on HN, Reddit and everywhere else on the web )
Without that $10B payment per year from Google, its whole Services Strategy will fail. Also one reason why Apple is pushing the IAP so hard in the recent 12 months. Google's payment used to grow as Apple's Active Users grow. But I think Apple is projecting a slow down in their Active Users count ( Mac, iPad, iPhone ) so they are starting to push IAP to further increase their Services revenue.