Apple's Siri seen cutting Google out of valuable mobile ad views
Apple's new Siri voice control on the iPhone 4S can answer questions, access information and deliver search results without displaying any advertising, which one analysis says will hurt search providers like Google.
If users were to become more accustomed to search by voice through Siri rather than visiting Google's website and typing a query, it could place Google at risk, a new analysis from Nigam Arora suggests. Arora noted that before buying an iPhone 4S with Siri, he was required to search for an Indian restaurant through Google's website.
"Google would have made money if I clicked on any one of a number of advertisements for restaurants on the search page," he said. "Siri completely bypassed Google and went to a database called Yelp."
Arora believes that Siri could change users' mobile habits, making them search for information via Apple's Siri rather than directly through Google. He thinks Siri is a better solution because it provides a small number of relevant results rather than a long list that users must sort through. Plus, he views advertisements on a small screen like an iPhone as a distraction.
To support his hypothesis, Arora cites a small study he conducted, in which a total of 40 iPhone 4S users were queried about their mobile search habits. All 40 said they see no need to search Google if Siri can answer their question, while 27 indicated they have not done a single direct Google search since they obtained their iPhone 4S.
Of course, Siri does provide Google search results if a user asks the service to search the Web. Answers are also provided through Bing, Wolfram Alpha, Wikipedia, Yelp and Yahoo.
But because users do not need to visit or view a website to utilize Siri, companies like Google that rely heavily on advertising revenue could be stung by user adoption of Siri.
"The way most searches are done at present is merely a temporary phase that will disappear," Arora said. "The business model of Google is at risk. There will always be a need for an index search like Google performs, but the most common search activities will drift away from Google. The problem for Google is that it makes the most money from the most common searches."
If users were to become more accustomed to search by voice through Siri rather than visiting Google's website and typing a query, it could place Google at risk, a new analysis from Nigam Arora suggests. Arora noted that before buying an iPhone 4S with Siri, he was required to search for an Indian restaurant through Google's website.
"Google would have made money if I clicked on any one of a number of advertisements for restaurants on the search page," he said. "Siri completely bypassed Google and went to a database called Yelp."
Arora believes that Siri could change users' mobile habits, making them search for information via Apple's Siri rather than directly through Google. He thinks Siri is a better solution because it provides a small number of relevant results rather than a long list that users must sort through. Plus, he views advertisements on a small screen like an iPhone as a distraction.
To support his hypothesis, Arora cites a small study he conducted, in which a total of 40 iPhone 4S users were queried about their mobile search habits. All 40 said they see no need to search Google if Siri can answer their question, while 27 indicated they have not done a single direct Google search since they obtained their iPhone 4S.
Of course, Siri does provide Google search results if a user asks the service to search the Web. Answers are also provided through Bing, Wolfram Alpha, Wikipedia, Yelp and Yahoo.
But because users do not need to visit or view a website to utilize Siri, companies like Google that rely heavily on advertising revenue could be stung by user adoption of Siri.
"The way most searches are done at present is merely a temporary phase that will disappear," Arora said. "The business model of Google is at risk. There will always be a need for an index search like Google performs, but the most common search activities will drift away from Google. The problem for Google is that it makes the most money from the most common searches."
Comments
As does the whole iOS app paradigm. Google is about the web not the internet per se, Apple is removing the need for the web more and more with the iOS approach. Google is doomed.
I don't see how Google can compete with Apple on this front. I see two distinct obstacles for Google. The first is the lack of direct revenue from Android that investing in a built-in intelligent personal assistant might not be cost effective. The other is the number of Android-based devices on the market. Google would need so many more dedicated servers for parsing these queries that they might have to purposely limit its intelligence to make it useable. The only comparable solution I see is for Google to offer a paid service that vendors can opt-in to include with Android, but even that has its pitfalls.
I wonder if this Apple/Yelp relationship had anything to do with Yelp stepping up its attacks against Google from scraping content.
To paraphrase: "The competitor of my competitor is my partner."
So what happens when websites that rely on ad revenues start blocking Siri requests?
Exactly. If google makes money on ads from searching, why would it even allow outside apps to use its searching abilities? If all the search engines blocked remote searches by dedicated apps, those apps would likely have to pay those companies to use their services.
Who says Apple isn't paying them?
So what happens when websites that rely on ad revenues start blocking Siri requests?
How will they know it is from Siri rather than someone typing in a request manually?
We can all do our bit to thumb our noses at Mountain View by using this site instead of Google:
http://scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm
... basically it's a front end for Google that blocks cookies (including Google's notorious cookie with the 2038 expiry date) and returns search results stripped of adverts.
Andy Rubin
I don't see how Google can compete with Apple on this front. I see two distinct obstacles for Google. The first is the lack of direct revenue from Android that investing in a built-in intelligent personal assistant might not be cost effective. The other is the number of Android-based devices on the market. Google would need so many more dedicated servers for parsing these queries that they might have to purposely limit its intelligence to make it useable. The only comparable solution I see is for Google to offer a paid service that vendors can opt-in to include with Android, but even that has its pitfalls.
Don't forget, Android is winning. /s
Google makes money if you click on an ad, not just by using Google to search. What an FUD article.
When people use siri for a google search there is no ad displayed. Which means there is no ad to click. And that means less money for google.
Google makes money if you click on an ad, not just by using Google to search. What an FUD article.
Not true. Many of Google's ad programs charge you so much per view as well as so much per click-through.
Exactly. If google makes money on ads from searching, why would it even allow outside apps to use its searching abilities? If all the search engines blocked remote searches by dedicated apps, those apps would likely have to pay those companies to use their services.
Who says Apple isn't paying them?
If they aren't, I'm sure Google will try. Look at what they're doing with Google Maps. If you access it more than 25,000 times per day, you pay. I suspect Google will try something similar with search.
"I don?t believe that your phone should be an assistant. Your phone is a tool for communicating. You shouldn?t be communicating with the phone; you should be communicating with somebody on the other side of the phone."
Andy Rubin
So when I use my phone for doing Google searches in its web browser Rubin has a problem with that? I think Rubin has some sour grapes over Siri.
If they aren't, I'm sure Google will try. Look at what they're doing with Google Maps. If you access it more than 25,000 times per day, you pay. I suspect Google will try something similar with search.
That would be reasonable though. I have no problems with Google doing that.
I have to confess this I read this and laughed very loudly. Google's entire business is built upon selling advertising — if Apple (and others) can begin to leverage that ad traffic away, things could get very interesting, very rapidly. For one, I'd like to see Google forced to compete in the mobile OS space on an even playing field. At the moment, Android, its strengths and weaknesses aside, is a major loss-leader for Google and serves merely to drive advertising traffic to them.
We can all do our bit to thumb our noses at Mountain View by using this site instead of Google:
http://scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm
... basically it's a front end for Google that blocks cookies (including Google's notorious cookie with the 2038 expiry date) and returns search results stripped of adverts.
Who uses Google Search anyway?
I haven't seen an ad on the Internet for many years and I switched Safari (and other browsers) to Yahoo! a couple of years ago.
Interestingly, this is not Apple or Steve Jobs "Go(ing) Thermouclear War" on Google. Siri would have done far more damage to Google if Apple had not made significant changes to Siri. I am actually puzzled by some of the changes Apple made to Siri although I very much enjoy what Siri does today (most of which it didn't do previously).
Here is a list of what Siri could previously do and would have, in my estimation, have done significantly more damage to Google:
OpenTable, Gayot, CitySearch, BooRah, Yelp, Yahoo Local, ReserveTravel, Localeze for restaurant and business questions and actions:
"I am looking for a quiet, romantic Italian restaurant. Reserve a table for me on Tuesday at 7 p.m."
Siri would previously "read" Yelp reviews for comments about "quiet" and "romantic" and display the results with user reviews and direct links to Yelp. Now, I must click on the small icon at the bottom to view Yelp results and I can't reserve a table. Siri used OpenTable to actually make the reservation (using SMS) for you.
Eventful, StubHub, and LiveKick for events and concert information:
"What is going on this weekend?"
Siri provided a list of activities across a range of interests. This was an extremely nice feature.
MovieTickets, RottenTomatoes and the New York Times for movie information and reviews
"Any good movies out right now? I would like tickets to xxx, Friday at 9 p.m."
Siri had movie information and you could order tickets. I hope Apple will integrate their iTunes Movie Trailers (which is an outstanding App) with Siri as soon as possible.
TaxiMagic for transportation:
"I need a taxi at my current location as soon as possible."
Siri would previously request a taxi for you via SMS.
If Apple integrates similar services and provides their own mapping and navigation next year, I can envision the death of Google Android.
Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%. Google itself is losing money on Android due to the purchase of Motorola Mobile Inc. I can't understand how this is a sustainable model especially when Google has stated that the lion's share of their mobile advertising profits are generated from Apple iPhone.
Not true. Many of Google's ad programs charge you so much per view as well as so much per click-through.
Not in search, at least not to my knowledge. They do own DoubleClick and there they have different ad programs. I have never heard of any pay by page view in Google search, only click through.
So when I use my phone for doing Google searches in its web browser Rubin has a problem with that? I think Rubin has some sour grapes over Siri.
No kidding. I am surprised at his very limited view of a smart phone. But I think it is safe to presume he is working the new Android voice reckognition technology as we speak. Its gonna be called er? Rubin.
Who uses Google Search anyway?
On my Mac and iDevices I use Google for all interest searches.
If Apple integrates similar services and provides their own mapping and navigation next year, I can envision the death of Google Android.
It does sound like Jobs kept his promise in destroying Android, but is doing it through a really clever attack at Google's core profit center in a way that will make it hard for Google and vendors to justify the use of Android OS.
Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%.
I was hopin someone would run the numbers. That 90% from just two companies. That seems pretty extreme.
Don't forget, Android is winning. /s
Winning what? In a story that just came out today, Apple makes 52% of the profits of the entire mobile phone industry, even though its total phone share (worldwide) is 4%.
That includes all those Android manufacturers who you say are winning. You must think HP is winning the computer market also - it sells the most computers, doesn't it?