This is monopolistic collusion which regulators may well try to address in various ways indicated including interoperability. Self-evidently the deal suits Google and Apple. If Microsoft outbid Google then it would simply replace one bilateral deal of collusion between 2 of the 5 GAFAMs, with another.
All the other 4 search choices in Safari are Bing. Whatever they say (and some are more transparent than others) Duck, Ecosia and Yahoo are Bing. So you might argue the whole search choice menu is 3-way GAFAM collusion.
The way to help users, and indeed customers who use search advertising, would be to allow easy use of multiple search engines on browsers. I want to be able to easily use all or some of crawlers Google, Bing, Mojeek, syndicates Duck, Ecosia, Startpage and others like Brave .... with one click the way I can on Firefox, or in other ways. Wouldn't you like that?
No one search engine, or syndicate if you prefer to use those, can be the search or "answer" engine which will always be best. We get more value as users if we have a healthy market with multiple choices for search, and an easy way to use them all.
But then I would say this; self-disclosure CEO of Mojeek - an independent no-tracking search engine.
Mobile OSes are not restaurants. Believe it or not, but people are pretty happy with their mobile OSes. We've seen phone usage increase and stay very high. And people dish out up to $2k for new devices. People continue to spend a lot on phones and replace them often.
You can not like certain practices of Google or Apple or aspects of their privacy policy, but don't gaslight yourself by saying that somehow the average device consumer is terribly concerned or hurt in any meaningful direct way. Most people like their phones and when you get a well funded competitor like Blackberry or Amazon or even Google hardware, people shrug and go back to Samsung/Apple
I don't think a disagree. I think this is exactly what makes this so tricky. On the consumer side, users have a choice, pick their favorite, occasionally switch when they buy a new phone, and are generally content.
However on the supply side, there are 2 disjoint monopolies. You reach iOS users through Apple's monopoly on iOS distribution, and you reach Android users through Google's [near-]monopoly on Android distribution.
To continue the hurt analogy, it's the difference between there being 2 restaurant chains in every town and there being 1 restaurant chain for the Eastern US and a different chain for the Western US (and moving across the country cost $400-$800).
But thre are literally millions of fast food restaurants to choose from, accessible to everyone.
In mobile space, we basically have two OSes with their default browsers and search engine, and in browser space we have three, and all of them basically use one of the two search engines (and their derivatives).
Good point. Is that healthy?
Perhaps you don't mind but I would like to be able to choose between Pepsi and Coke too; when buying for someone else. At least in most restaurants I can personally choose also from other brands with more healthy products.
No the comment is to show that this is standard business practice that goes back further than any of us have been alive.
BTW, MCDonalds has such a s sweet deal that they will never leave. AKA they will always pay the lowest price for the Coke syrups out of any of Coke's vendors. Giving you a cup, lid and straw cost more than filling up that cup with a Coke product.
Monopolistic practices indeed go back further than any of us have been alive, and so do most crimes. That doesn't mean it's not bad and shouldn't be fought against…
Excusing a bad situation by pointing to another situation equally bad doesn't make the situation less bad, it's just sophism. (And I won't even argue that there's at least an order of magnitude in the sums involved and that the consequences in terms of individual freedom of the two situations are of completely different scale,sibling comments have done so already).
All the other 4 search choices in Safari are Bing. Whatever they say (and some are more transparent than others) Duck, Ecosia and Yahoo are Bing. So you might argue the whole search choice menu is 3-way GAFAM collusion.
The way to help users, and indeed customers who use search advertising, would be to allow easy use of multiple search engines on browsers. I want to be able to easily use all or some of crawlers Google, Bing, Mojeek, syndicates Duck, Ecosia, Startpage and others like Brave .... with one click the way I can on Firefox, or in other ways. Wouldn't you like that?
No one search engine, or syndicate if you prefer to use those, can be the search or "answer" engine which will always be best. We get more value as users if we have a healthy market with multiple choices for search, and an easy way to use them all.
But then I would say this; self-disclosure CEO of Mojeek - an independent no-tracking search engine.