or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google pays Apple $100M/year for search on iPhone - rumor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google pays Apple $100M/year for search on iPhone - rumor

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 
Having Google as the default search engine on the iPhone is rumored to earn Apple more than $100 million per year in a revenue sharing deal between the two companies, a new report alleges.

Downplaying rumors that Apple could be working on its own search engine, Silicon Alley Insider cited an anonymous source Thursday as stating that the iPhone maker has no intention of getting into the business that Google dominates. That same source claimed that Apple earns more than $100 million a year in a revenue sharing deal with Google.

In addition to being the search provider for Safari on the iPhone, Google also powers the native Maps application included with Apple's handset. The source claimed that making Google Maps a provider for the initial iPhone in 2007 was a simple two-week process. But when GPS was added to the iPhone 3G, negotiations between the two technology giants allegedly lasted six months.

"Google wanted access to all sorts of data from the maps, but Apple didn't want to give it up, according to this person," the report said.

While the $100 million in annual revenue is cited as a reason for Apple to not develop its own search engine, it's also a fraction of the $15.68 billion the company posted in revenue last quarter alone.

The news follows rumors from weeks ago that Apple and Microsoft were in talks to make its Bing search engine the default provider for the iPhone. Control of the handset's Maps application was also said to be a part of those ongoing discussions.

In spite of their ongoing partnership, a perception of rivalry between Apple and Google has grown in the public's eye since Google CEO Eric Schmidt resigned from Apple's board of directors last August. Both Google and Apple were the subjects of a Federal Trade Commmission investigation for potential antitrust ties. Schmidt chose to resign because Google's Android mobile operating system and forthcoming Chrome OS netbook operating system look to compete with Apple's iPhone and Mac OS X, respectively.

Apple, too, showed signs in 2009 that it intends to tread into Google's territory soon. Last summer, Apple purchased Google Maps competitor Placebase. Later in the year, it sought to hire a full-time employee to take its iPhone Maps application "to the next level."

Apple has also entered the mobile advertising business after its purchase of Quattro Wireless, believed to be worth $275 million, in December. Through the acquisition, Apple also named the former CEO of Quattro Wireless, Andy Miller, to a new position: vice president of Mobile Advertising.
post #2 of 52
100million dollars is a drop in the bucket for apple.

I think it's more important not to alienate their customers.

Instead of getting into the search business or switching to bing, they should increase their share of the search ad revenue coming from the iPhone.
post #3 of 52
That's like one of these companies bringing over a 20 dollar bottle of wine to compliment dinner.

100Million! oOooOooOOOOOooooooh!
post #4 of 52
Apple has no intentions of getting into the search engine, but we have purchased Placebase for doing something with Maps and we purchased Quattro Wireless, for doing something with Mobile Advertising. We do not, however, have any intention of entering the search business!

But if they did, I wonder what a Apple search engine would look like? And I wonder if Apple would revive the name of "Sherlock"? Hhmmmm... \

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #5 of 52
So this begs the question, how much is Apple getting paid to keep Flash off the iPad, and by whom?


Or another way, How much is Apple saving by not having to pay Adobe for Flash support?


Hmmm....
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #6 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacob1varghese View Post

100million dollars is a drop in the bucket for apple.

I think it's more important not to alienate their customers.

Instead of getting into the search business or switching to bing, they should increase their share of the search ad revenue coming from the iPhone.

the 100 M is only about a .2 percent of their total revenue. BUT remember there are no costs associated with this revenue. So its basically pure profit. Specifically 1.6 percent of profits.

Again not huge but not insignificant.

What did that map company do? I am wondering if Apple would like to "customize" the look ad feel of maps but still use Google for the back end stuff.
post #7 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So this begs the question, how much is Apple getting paid to keep Flash off the iPod, and by whom?

LOL, good one.

I still personally think that it should be an OPTION for customers to use flash on the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. If you think that Flash is the devil, evil, raped your mom, whatever -- then DON'T install it
post #8 of 52
And how much are they getting for using google as the only possible search engine for desktop Safari?
post #9 of 52
This seems outrageously false.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #10 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

LOL, good one.

I still personally think that it should be an OPTION for customers to use flash on the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. If you think that Flash is the devil, evil, raped your mom, whatever -- then DON'T install it

Flash is a runtime engine, i.e. interprets code... this goes against the developer agreement. Therefor, we will not see Flash on the iPhone anytime soon. It is also why we will not see other browsers on the iPhone unless they are based off the webkit engine included in the OS.

There are three reasons they do this... security, stability, and privacy. Apple checks for these three basic criteria while applications move through the acceptance process. It would impossible to check for any of these if they allowed the installation of a 3rd party runtime engine, where code can be downloaded and executed after installation.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #11 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So this begs the question, how much is Apple getting paid to keep Flash off the iPad, and by whom?

Welcome to Trollsville population you, oh and teckdud
post #12 of 52
What does it mean when a rumor site labels one (and only one) of its articles with the word "rumor"? That the rest are just invention?
post #13 of 52
My bet is that Apple ARE working on their own search engine. We will see it within 5 years.
It makes complete strategical and philosophical sense, whatever anyone says.

If Apple can generate $100mil for themselves in revenue sharing, one can only guess that the traffic that they send is worth 3 to 5 times that.

Thats half a billon $ Apple may as well keep for themselves.

Money aside, Apple are currently too reliant on google. It's dangerous IMO to be in that situation.
post #14 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesium133x View Post

What does it mean when a rumor site labels one (and only one) of its articles with the word "rumor"? That the rest are just invention?

You found the source of other rumours?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #15 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So this begs the question, how much is Apple getting paid to keep Flash off the iPad, and by whom?

Thats a real pot smoker thing to say. Nobody is paying Apple. It's in Apple's own (and the consumers long term) interest to keep that god awful technology off the iPad/iPhone.
post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

My bet is that Apple ARE working on their own search engine. We will see it within 5 years.
It makes complete strategical and philosophical sense, whatever anyone says.

I think 5 years is more likely than this year, though it does depend on when they started.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #17 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think 5 years is more likely than this year, though it does depend on when they started.

My guess would be that Apple started no later than the date Google confirmed the Android platform.
post #18 of 52
So where is my cut? I want a cut of the cake or I will send Google a note that if they pay me I will use android instead.
post #19 of 52
Quote:
Welcome to Trollsville population you, oh and teckdud

TeckStud is a troll.

I don't try to troll, I just Trip because I think outside the box sometimes and question the status quo. It's the blind lemmings that believe everything they are told to think who have trouble with those that question like myself.


Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Thats a real pot smoker thing to say. Nobody is paying Apple. It's in Apple's own (and the consumers long term) interest to keep that god awful technology off the iPad/iPhone.


There you see, someone who knows and a little paranoia doesn't hurt, keeps one on their toes asking questions.

I really should have said:

How much money is Apple saving not having to pay Adobe for Flash support?

Ahhh... the plot thickens...
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #20 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

How much money is Apple saving not having to pay Adobe for Flash support?

I wasn't aware that Apple payed Adobe in the first place.
post #21 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

How much money is Apple saving not having to pay Adobe for Flash support?

Ahhh... the plot thickens...

It is clear why Apple doesn't want Flash on the iPhone or iPad. They do not have any control over it. And I don't mean that in a fascist way at all.

Apple's experience with Flash on OS X has been truly awful; security, stability and performance issues. In fact, with Safari 4, Apple has decided to push Flash objects into their own sandbox to prevent them from bringing down the entire browser.

The control aspect comes in when there is a legitimate issue with Flash and Apple is completely powerless to fix it. They must wait for Adobe to fix the issue and as history has shown, Adobe doesn't care about the end user experience (especially on the Mac) all they care about is selling Flash tools to developers.

So the user suffers and the experience of using the device is drown under shitty Flash code. I would be extremely upset if I bought a device to surf the web and it constantly crashed on me. You really think Apple is going to let that happen? Do you really think Apple will ever let Flash on its mobile devices?

Even the mobile Mozilla browser has turned off default Flash support, because it made the entire experience unbearable.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

I just Trip because I think outside the box sometimes and question the status quo.

1) Be objective. Question everything, not just the status quo.

2) Paranoia is a delusion, it is not a path to understanding.

3) You are so far into the center of the box you don't even realize there is a box.

4) Not comprehending any other points of view on think forum is not good critical thinking.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Having Google as the default search engine on the iPhone is rumored to earn Apple more than $100 million per year in a revenue sharing deal between the two companies, a new report alleges.

Has Apple done something wrong?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #24 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

It is clear why Apple doesn't want Flash on the iPhone or iPad. They do not have any control over it. And I don't mean that in a fascist way at all.

Apple's experience with Flash on OS X has been truly awful; security, stability and performance issues. In fact, with Safari 4, Apple has decided to push Flash objects into their own sandbox to prevent them from bringing down the entire browser.

The control aspect comes in when there is a legitimate issue with Flash and Apple is completely powerless to fix it. They must wait for Adobe to fix the issue and as history has shown, Adobe doesn't care about the end user experience (especially on the Mac) all they care about is selling Flash tools to developers.

So the user suffers and the experience of using the device is drown under shitty Flash code. I would be extremely upset if I bought a device to surf the web and it constantly crashed on me. You really think Apple is going to let that happen? Do you really think Apple will ever let Flash on its mobile devices?

Even the mobile Mozilla browser has turned off default Flash support, because it made the entire experience unbearable.


Perhaps it's Safari that's at fault.

Perhaps, because Apple changes things so often, with their OS, their hardware, their browser, that it makes it extremely difficult for third party developers to keep up with the changes, fix security issues or even make it profitable?

Adobe might just fine and dandy with Flash on over 95% of the computers and most of the web sites out there.

By the way, a security expert has ranked Safari LAST under Firefox and IE for security, another has said hacking Safari is trivial

Quote:
Nitesh Dhanjani, researcher and consultant: "...the Safari Web browser also has a lousy reputation in the security community--it almost seems a child's play to locate an exploitable condition in Safari...

Quote:
Frank Heidt, CEO of Leviathan Security: "From a browser (security) standpoint, I would choose Firefox over IE, and IE over Safari."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #25 of 52
I know Apple likes to control the entire widget, but nobody uses a search engine or a keyword any more, they Google. I don't think that term will ever be replaced.

Think about this seriously. How could Apple possibly improve on the ability to type a single misspelled word into a little box in the corner of your browser and get the result you were looking for?

Apple has managed to add one noun to our language: iPod. It now represents any personal audio player. But iPhone will never be anything more than just another smart phone just as iMac is only one model of computer. If they do a search tool it'll just be a search tool, never a verb. Those who agree with me might be thinking "no shit Sherlock" which just proves that Apple can never use that name.
post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

I know Apple likes to control the entire widget, but nobody uses a search engine or a keyword any more, they Google. I don't think that term will ever be replaced.

Think about this seriously. How could Apple possibly improve on the ability to type a single misspelled word into a little box in the corner of your browser and get the result you were looking for?

Apple has managed to add one noun to our language: iPod. It now represents any personal audio player. But iPhone will never be anything more than just another smart phone just as iMac is only one model of computer. If they do a search tool it'll just be a search tool, never a verb. Those who agree with me might be thinking "no shit Sherlock" which just proves that Apple can never use that name.


Well people might "Google" but Microsoft, who makes Windows on 90% of the PC's out there, installs IE by default which uses Bing, a search engine by Microsoft. (except in the European Union who new Windows users can get a choice of browsers from a default window)

It could be eventually people just "Bing" instead of "Googling" *shutters at the thought*

So it's looking like Google is paying Apple to not create their own search engine...


At least on Firefox there is a menu field (like Safari) and little drop down menu with a choice of search engines by default (except Bing) but one can add their own if they wish to the list.

I find it handy to search Wikipedia or eBay, directly from the browser bar.

Safari of course won't have this feature because Apple is getting paid by Google to keep the others off or not creating their own.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #27 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So it's looking like Google is paying Apple to not create their own search engine...

Not everything in life is a conspiracy you know!

Check my post count 666... freaky eh, could I be the devil?
post #28 of 52
Ah, I see that Apple 'earns' its 'revenues' again......
post #29 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Not everything in life is a conspiracy you know!

Check my post count 666... freaky eh, could I be the devil?

Funny, I just noticed on this thread your consistant post count. I was going to say something but thought I should stock up on garlic, rosary beads, wooden stakes, silver bullets and the like first. You can't be too careful these days...
post #30 of 52
I'd say $100+ million per year is good reason to exclude other browsers from the iPhone.
post #31 of 52
Don't kid yourself, Apple is working on a Search engine. It might never release it, but if Google gets to big for it's britches, Apple will cut Google off.
post #32 of 52
Not really. Goole is paying Apple to bring it traffic to sell ads. In return, it is sharing revenue. Personally, I think Google is getting sick of sharing the revenue. That is why it is releasing products like Chrome. The more it takes share from Firefox and Safari, the less it will have to pay.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So it's looking like Google is paying Apple to not create their own search engine...
post #33 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Don't kid yourself, Apple is working on a Search engine. It might never release it, but if Google gets to big for it's britches, Apple will cut Google off.

Revenue from Google = $100M/year
Revenue from everthing = $50B/year

I'd say that that would warrant some R&D into a Search Engine. They already do searches on their Macs which needs to be improved and I'm sure they've thought of some ways to improve on the way web search engines work.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #34 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Revenue from Google = $100M/year
Revenue from everthing = $50B/year

Revenue from Apple search engine = $0.

Quote:
I'd say that that would warrant some R&D into a Search Engine.

N.B. It takes more than just a little research and implementation.
post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Revenue from Apple search engine = $0.

HUH? Why exactly would one expect them to make money from an internet search engine if it doesn't yet exist?

Quote:
N.B. It takes more than just a little research and implementation.

You take special note, you can't start getting serious about a new service until spend money researching and developing it. If you don't think spending millions to develop this technology is a method to eventually implement it then how exactly do you think Apple would being to pursue it?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #36 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

HUH? Why exactly would one expect them to make money from an internet search engine if it doesn't yet exist?



You take special note, you can't start getting serious about a new service until spend money researching and developing it.

You omitted selling it, billing for it, and paying for it. Just building and operating a search engine doesn't make money, it costs money.

Unlike the $50B in annual revenue you mentioned, the $100+ million from Google is essentially pure profit.
post #37 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

You omitted selling it, billing for it, and paying for it.

That $100+ million from Google is essentially pure profit, by the way.

That's why I included the revenue they do make, not they revenue they don't make from a service that doesn't exist. I'm agreeing with TBell's assessment that it would behoove Apple to look into offering an internet search engine. Should I also include how much Apple makes from selling doorstops? (hint: $0)
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #38 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That's why I included the revenue they do make, not they revenue they don't make from a service that doesn't exist.

Let's say it already exists.
Revenue = (negative)

Quote:
Should I also include how much Apple makes from selling doorstops? (hint: $0)

Got you covered! If Apple is investing R&D into doorstops, the associated revenue is also negative unless and until Apple can sell them in sufficient quantities. Turns out, designing and building prototype doorstops is actually pretty easy.
post #39 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Let's say it already exists.
Revenue = (negative)

Got you covered! If Apple is investing R&D into doorstops, the associated revenue is also negative unless and until Apple can sell them in sufficient quantities. Turns out, designing and building prototype doorstops is actually pretty easy.

So you your against R&D because it costs money? Unicorns and fairydust didn't magically put the iPad in Steve Job's hand. Hold up, who paid for that special event? Could it have been Apple? Seriously, what could you possibly have against companies doing R&D?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #40 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Don't kid yourself, Apple is working on a Search engine. It might never release it, but if Google gets to big for it's britches, Apple will cut Google off.

And who'd use it other than a minority of folks who use Apple products? And realistically, most users who own Apple products would still use Google over anything Apple puts out. Google get's more and more accurate every time people use it. That's part of Google's big success. How do you create a product like that, without actually getting people to use your product in the first place. I just can't see Apple being all that great at taking on Google for things like search. And it'd have to be all domains too, not just web search, but news and images, etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google pays Apple $100M/year for search on iPhone - rumor