I wonder if this Apple/Yelp relationship had anything to do with Yelp stepping up its attacks against Google from scraping content.
The ultimate irony is that Apple could scrape their search results fromGoogle if they really wanted (note I doubt they will) much the same way the content providers accuse Google of doing.
I think it is more likely that Apple may (if they are not already doing so) set up a similar Ad based auction house for how Siri returns it's results. This would be more effective than iAd.
Google makes money if you click on an ad, not just by using Google to search. What an FUD article.
Re-read the article, then review your comment again. Siri doesn't show ads so there is no ad to click on, hence no money for Google unless Apple/Siri have some sort of deal on the side with Google.
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
Did I understand you correctly - When you enter a query in the Safari web search box, you get no ads in the results? That's just not true in general. Only weird queries generate no ads.
Re-read the article, then review your comment again. Siri doesn't show ads so there is no ad to click on, hence no money for Google unless Apple/Siri have some sort of deal on the side with Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Yes, it would seem impractical for Google to shoulder the costs for Siri without getting anything in return.
Magic 8-Ball says new service terms are coming...
Well, if you ask Siri to search using either Google or Bing, you will get ads.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
It's not too early. Siri is a proven hit. If it does not grow into a greater success, it would be Apple's fault for fumbling it. Recent history suggests that Apple succeeds more often than it bungles.
From my experiences, the delay is really network dependent more than anything. I've had times where it responded instantly, and times when it went processing for minutes. On WiFi, it always responds instantly, at least in its current form, so I don't think theres much room for improvement there.
I can say from personal experience that the Siri delays are roughly the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
On the processing power, you have a point. but considering the potential for how easy this makes google searches, I think google will find it worthwhile.
Google will have no problems building the computational power needed, assuming they don't have it already. The power of Google search relies heavily on their server farms. They have been doing this a whole lot longer than Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
Guess my point got lost in my words. My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
Not true AI? Why? The natural language processing alone qualifies it as true AI.
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
Unless I am mistaken, companies pay Google for their position in search results -- through things like ad words.
So, even if you see no ads, you are seeing a list of results where the companies that pay the most are at the top of the list on the 1st page of results.
That's "Front Page, Above the Fold" in the Newspaper business, "Aisle End-Cap Displays" and "Eye-level Shelves" in the Supermarket business, "Outside Back Cover" then "Inside Front Cover" in the Magazine business, A "Window Display" in your favorite phone store ...
Google originally didn't have any ads when you did a search. They only did that after they realized they had a great service but no money coming in to support it. Same story with Facebook ? originally no ads, now ads everywhere.
Apple is in a different situation because they have a product built around Siri ? the iPhone 4S. Siri sells iPhone 4S, so it doesn't need support from advertising.
Where the story might change is if/when the databases Siri is accessing, those providers start charging more for Siri access. Then apple might have to modify their pricing for the 4S, or do adds. My guess is the former. OR apple already has deals in place with the providers so they can't hike prices in the future.
Google is in trouble in this scenario because they don't make anything, they just pull their content from other sites. So apple has no need to have Siri interface with them, because they can go directly to the content makers.
That makes Siri essentially a new type of search engine for mobile phones. Google went into the phone business, and now apple is in the search engine business.
God that's smart ? they were probably planning this all along.
Unless I am mistaken, companies pay Google for their position in search results -- through things like ad words. [/I][/B]
You're both incorrect. Adwords ads show on the right hand side of the page and the first few of the top results in the middle of the page. The rest of the results are "organic" meaning the pages google thinks are most important (which is based on a lot of factors.)
You can't pay google to rank higher in the organic results, you can only pay them to rank higher in the adwords results.
It's not always obvious which results are ads. Over time they have tried to blur them as much as possible to keep you from avoiding clicking the ads.
... My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
I kinda think that statements in the general form of
"Siri is not [X]"
or
"Siri cannot [do Y]"
probably ought to contain the qualifier "yet."
I mean, this Siri thing, while pretty interesting already, might very well be hugely interesting in the not-so-distant future if its theoretical potential is even partly actualized. It could be a paradigm-shifter. A new form of human/machine interaction. I can easily imagine Steve Jobs' excitement over the possibilities here.
So okay, granted the AI is currently in a somewhat fetal stage of development. Fetuses do grow up, given the proper nurturing and whatnot. Apple seems to realize it's on to something important here -- when have they ever released a beta anything into the wild? It's likely they'll be feeding and grooming this thing for all it's worth. Whatever effect this all has or doesnt have on Google seems rather a side-show.
Don't forget that google already has a framework for something like this in place. They have voice search, a huge database of voice samples from google 411 and some IP regarding voice recognition.
They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products ), or interactive as siri. Will google expand on voice actions to match siri? I don't know for sure, but with all the hype around siri right now, i wouldn't be surprised if they do.
You obviously dont get it. Why would Google hop on that boat? They would get zero advertising income! Atleast with their current business model.
They could do the same with voice in android but would people really trust that information that would get represented to the user if some of the hits were paid hits and some wherent. As many have said they dont click on the ads in the beginning nor the right side on googles searchpage. If the user cant trust the results it will ne hard to sell your service to the user. Google is going to have a very difficult time if they consider going down the same road as apple!
I do hope your 4S arrives soon -- Siri can help you with your math [homework]
I do agree that it is really clever how Google is now endangered by Siri (with help from SJ)...
...and lets give credit where credit is due -- the clever by one half persons: Rubin, Schmidt, Page.
Would not say no to being "clever by one half" then... Page basically built one of the biggest tech companies on Earth. What have you built? Rubin and Schmidt are far from idiots either!
I'm been testing out Siri on my new 4S. When I can get through to their servers (it's been quite annoying) I am not seeing any queries that are clearly using Google directly in Siri's interface, excluding Maps (of course) where Google and Apple have a longstanding deal. I see definite Yelp and Wolfram-Alpha results, but all potential Google searches give me an option to open up in Safari where Google is my default browser search and ads are shown.
Comments
I wonder if this Apple/Yelp relationship had anything to do with Yelp stepping up its attacks against Google from scraping content.
The ultimate irony is that Apple could scrape their search results fromGoogle if they really wanted (note I doubt they will) much the same way the content providers accuse Google of doing.
I think it is more likely that Apple may (if they are not already doing so) set up a similar Ad based auction house for how Siri returns it's results. This would be more effective than iAd.
Google makes money if you click on an ad, not just by using Google to search. What an FUD article.
Re-read the article, then review your comment again. Siri doesn't show ads so there is no ad to click on, hence no money for Google unless Apple/Siri have some sort of deal on the side with Google.
Apple has a nice bargaining chip with Google by not opening up Siri for use in the large installed base of other iOS devices.
Like the woman in the dentist's chair...
As he tilts the chair back, the woman grabs the dentist's testicles and says:
"Now, we're not going to hurt each other, are we?"
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
I wonder if this Apple/Yelp relationship had anything to do with Yelp stepping up its attacks against Google from scraping content.
I wonder if Apple is getting some revenue split from Yelp?
What a stupid article.
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
Did I understand you correctly - When you enter a query in the Safari web search box, you get no ads in the results? That's just not true in general. Only weird queries generate no ads.
Re-read the article, then review your comment again. Siri doesn't show ads so there is no ad to click on, hence no money for Google unless Apple/Siri have some sort of deal on the side with Google.
Yes, it would seem impractical for Google to shoulder the costs for Siri without getting anything in return.
Magic 8-Ball says new service terms are coming...
Well, if you ask Siri to search using either Google or Bing, you will get ads.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
It's not too early. Siri is a proven hit. If it does not grow into a greater success, it would be Apple's fault for fumbling it. Recent history suggests that Apple succeeds more often than it bungles.
From my experiences, the delay is really network dependent more than anything. I've had times where it responded instantly, and times when it went processing for minutes. On WiFi, it always responds instantly, at least in its current form, so I don't think theres much room for improvement there.
I can say from personal experience that the Siri delays are roughly the same.
On the processing power, you have a point. but considering the potential for how easy this makes google searches, I think google will find it worthwhile.
Google will have no problems building the computational power needed, assuming they don't have it already. The power of Google search relies heavily on their server farms. They have been doing this a whole lot longer than Apple.
Guess my point got lost in my words. My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
Not true AI? Why? The natural language processing alone qualifies it as true AI.
What a stupid article.
How about when I go to Safari, go to the Google (other search engines are available) box top-right and type a query? The results page I get back has no adverts on it.
So much for Google relying on advertising, they can't even be bothered to put ads on their mobile result pages.
Unless I am mistaken, companies pay Google for their position in search results -- through things like ad words.
So, even if you see no ads, you are seeing a list of results where the companies that pay the most are at the top of the list on the 1st page of results.
That's "Front Page, Above the Fold" in the Newspaper business, "Aisle End-Cap Displays" and "Eye-level Shelves" in the Supermarket business, "Outside Back Cover" then "Inside Front Cover" in the Magazine business, A "Window Display" in your favorite phone store ...
It's called Placement.
Apple is in a different situation because they have a product built around Siri ? the iPhone 4S. Siri sells iPhone 4S, so it doesn't need support from advertising.
Where the story might change is if/when the databases Siri is accessing, those providers start charging more for Siri access. Then apple might have to modify their pricing for the 4S, or do adds. My guess is the former. OR apple already has deals in place with the providers so they can't hike prices in the future.
Google is in trouble in this scenario because they don't make anything, they just pull their content from other sites. So apple has no need to have Siri interface with them, because they can go directly to the content makers.
That makes Siri essentially a new type of search engine for mobile phones. Google went into the phone business, and now apple is in the search engine business.
God that's smart ? they were probably planning this all along.
Unless I am mistaken, companies pay Google for their position in search results -- through things like ad words. [/I][/B]
You're both incorrect. Adwords ads show on the right hand side of the page and the first few of the top results in the middle of the page. The rest of the results are "organic" meaning the pages google thinks are most important (which is based on a lot of factors.)
You can't pay google to rank higher in the organic results, you can only pay them to rank higher in the adwords results.
It's not always obvious which results are ads. Over time they have tried to blur them as much as possible to keep you from avoiding clicking the ads.
... My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
I kinda think that statements in the general form of
"Siri is not [X]"
or
"Siri cannot [do Y]"
probably ought to contain the qualifier "yet."
I mean, this Siri thing, while pretty interesting already, might very well be hugely interesting in the not-so-distant future if its theoretical potential is even partly actualized. It could be a paradigm-shifter. A new form of human/machine interaction. I can easily imagine Steve Jobs' excitement over the possibilities here.
So okay, granted the AI is currently in a somewhat fetal stage of development. Fetuses do grow up, given the proper nurturing and whatnot. Apple seems to realize it's on to something important here -- when have they ever released a beta anything into the wild? It's likely they'll be feeding and grooming this thing for all it's worth. Whatever effect this all has or doesnt have on Google seems rather a side-show.
Don't forget that google already has a framework for something like this in place. They have voice search, a huge database of voice samples from google 411 and some IP regarding voice recognition.
They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products
You obviously dont get it. Why would Google hop on that boat? They would get zero advertising income! Atleast with their current business model.
They could do the same with voice in android but would people really trust that information that would get represented to the user if some of the hits were paid hits and some wherent. As many have said they dont click on the ads in the beginning nor the right side on googles searchpage. If the user cant trust the results it will ne hard to sell your service to the user. Google is going to have a very difficult time if they consider going down the same road as apple!
Phones are becoming a mature product so with saturation getting close, voice ADS become a necessity.
There you go again.... it is either:
eighty-one percent from two companies
or
ninety percent from three companies
I do hope your 4S arrives soon -- Siri can help you with your math [homework]
I do agree that it is really clever how Google is now endangered by Siri (with help from SJ)...
...and lets give credit where credit is due -- the clever by one half persons: Rubin, Schmidt, Page.
Would not say no to being "clever by one half" then... Page basically built one of the biggest tech companies on Earth. What have you built? Rubin and Schmidt are far from idiots either!