or is it Google bots that are clicking on it?
i mean seriously who clicks on those things.
Can't tell if you're being serious or not.
Real people click on ads, and purchase, or we'd not "give" Google tens of thousands of dollars each year.
To Google we're just a small fry. They have advertisers whose daily ad spend equals our yearly spend.
happywaiman wrote: »
Apple will renew the deal with Google. (Apple will get around 10% of those ad income, so free money)
However, there's a catch.
Apple will build their own search engine, in the form of Spotlight, Siri and Smart Search Field
Google still have to paid the money (I believe they have a fix minimum payment. )
But before your query send to Google, you will be more likely click on the recommendation from Spotlight. (Think about it, if you are searching "Walter White" and Spotlight direct you to the wiki/wikia page directly, why press the Search button to click to the first result for the same page? )
I mean, after the MapGate by Scott Forstall, you really think Tim Cook will make the same mistake?
Click-farms are a problem (I've seen estimates that say 10-20%), though I don't think Google is the one doing them, or at least not directly.
I'm not sure which demographic are clicking on ads. I seldom do, but apparently a lot of people do click on them. Similarly, most TV commercials or print ads seem rather pointless, yet companies still pour money into those. It could just be the way I tend to browse – if I want a specific product I'm more likely to go to a vendor and search there (e.g. if I want a shirt, I'll go to Amazon and use Amazon's search) while others might just plug it into Google's search and then jump directly to the product page from there. Heck, from Google Analytics, a surprising number of people seem to go to web pages by typing the title into Google's search every time rather than using the web address or a bookmark.
One thing that Google (and others) allows is to track the correlation of who click on an ad vs. who clicks on an ad and then actually buys something. Presumably, enough people are clicking and buying that companies find it worthwhile to advertise. :shrug:
It seems that Apple is about providing the best features possible. I don't see how they could honor that tradition not default to the best search engine.
Full disclosure - I'm slightly pumping DuckDuckGo here, but still using Google more (out of habit and knowing some tricks) as I continue to evaluate it..... ...but it's growing on me.
DDG's been making headway in various arenas and glad to see a viable alternative search business model emerging, so getting closer to ready for prime time acceptance next to the "big engines." People can change default habits in large numbers over time - witness Safari, Chrome and FF vs IE, and Goog search being "down" to 75%.
Duck's also got some cool/unique features beyond vanilla search (e.g., !bangs), but all those things tend to be ancillary usage drivers since they're used mostly by the geek class who are a minority. And with so many features in the world of "so many apps/so many OSs/so many devices," even those who learn 'em tend to forget or not use 'em, so not true differentiators for the bulk of folk....
...One of the best reasons to use it, though - from the user side - is a "silent feature" or "unfeature" - the fact that search results are not personalized and based on your prior searches and clicks, so you're protected from getting lost in your own past info-consuming tendencies.(Which - delivering the same results for the same queries to all users - is what DDG calls avoiding "the filter bubble" - and is arguably as important as not collecting/saving/selling your search-related info - tho' no choice necessary since they do both.)(Still, once you arrive at a site from a search, of course, all the cross links there start sucking you back into filter bubbles - whether you're on a product site, a liberal/conservative/libertarian site, mainstream medicine or alt health site, Christian/Islamic/spiritual/atheist, etc. ad infinitum. Oh well... ...but Duck Duck Go's a tool that recognizes the issue at least.)
I think making Duck Duck Go the default option would not be such a bad move. I'd love to see Apple and DDG have a closer relationship. Apple could even invest in DDG to help see them improve their product. I like such a move more than the idea of Apple trying to become their own search engine.
I think Google had a tactic where they would invest in a company under conditions that if they were going to be bought out by someone Google would be given the first right to acquire them instead. Apple could do something like that. Invest in DDG, keep them independent, but retain the first right to acquire them if Google or Microsoft or Facebook tried to acquire them. Win-win-win.
Given the right recipe, apple can complement duck nicely, yes.
Does anybody really click ads (intentionally) that show up in a search result??? Just sayin'.
For me (assuming I'm somewhat typical of "fairly aware" but not the "most determined not to be herded" searchers), ads on the right side, never.
However, when you're shopping, it often feels like more work to get past the sponsored search results at the top of the Google results to find virtually the same non-sponsored link from the same vendor, e.g., Amazon, somewhere below.
So sometimes I make the effort just to not give them the satisfaction, and other times "make the click of least resistance." So, yeah.
And then there's all the less privacy concerned people out there.
I think Apple has already implemented their ultimate search plan, albeit in its very early stages: Spotlight. I think/hope that the ultimate goal is to continue to build up a huge and useful front end, that will negate the need (95% of the time) for the typical, unapealing back end list search that we are used to; for example, taking you directly to wikipedia, imdb, getty images, specific target website, etc.
The internet is too messy for Apple to be responsible for the entire package; as long as there's still porn and bomb making instructions on the internet, I don't see that Apple will want to be responsible for the back end.
Ideally, the back end would be DuckDuckGo, with an emphasis on privacy, of course. Any significant differences in quality between DDG and google could be made up for in the front end. Ideally, as a partner, Apple could then even help DDG clean things up (e.g. allocate resources to removing: bomb making instructions, terrorist propoganda (*ahem* google/youtube), child porn, etc.
This could be seen as a huge value add for the Apple ecosystem. If I was google, I'd be scared.
With all of the companies that Apple have bought to increase the search ability in the app store, they must have enough talent to make ?search and make it awesome. Considering the advertising revenue available and Apple's standing as the most known company in the world, they'd make Billions a year doing nothing.
With most things, Google had something good that worked well and made money, then they stopped bothering with it, same with maps.
Only competition will make them pull their finger out and make it better.
I decided to try Bing on my iPhone about a year ago, and honestly, it works well enough (and has enough less garbage on the results page) that I haven't switched back. I think a lot of Google's search success is momentum at this point. I think it is realistic to think they would lose 50% of iOS users if Apple changes the default.
It can't be entirely discounted that Apple still has something on the line here... ....the very (long-running) familiarity of Google as the search default.
"Bing" and "binging" aren't exactly common verbs yet (nor likely to ever become such), many of us can't even think of the word "Yahoo" without being traumatized by exposure to all of those horrible "yodeling" commercials from years past, and many find comfort in being presented splashes that they know and "get."Just try any search with B, Y, G and DDG, successively. Yahoo wants you to check your ancient email account. Bing is hawking its stupid rewards program. Google's the fullest of ads and other gingerbread, but it's familiar.And DDG is clean and sparse. So likely, IMO, to be the most appealing to those tired of Google.... ...but does offer fewer "resources" up front, e.g., G's "news, shopping, 'more' and search tools," Y's "local," etc.So those used to Google may feel vaguely ill at ease in its absence, and knowing that 75-90% of users never change any OS default settings, no, matter how easy, might make some more prone to feel comfy on Android with Google search and maps.I agree with others, though, that Spotlight and other tools/trends (e.g., resentment of Google's biz model where our eyeballs and selection presses become the info product they're peddling) are making this less important and that in a world where search is becoming another commodity, its search brand is carrying less and less clout. So Google is likely to take a bigger net long-term hit than Apple if they're dropped.
charlituna wrote: »
As I understand it Duck Duck Go is more in line with Apple's mildly militant pro privacy stance so I expect to see it as the default. But Google, Bing and Yahoo will likely be in the choices
Great idea seems doable
Also spamsand idea of choosing Siri search engine
I could also see perhaps Apple creating an aggregate search system. Sends the search to all four, strips out ads, known malware source aites etc and gives a list of all the hits using some kind of system to rank them based off how they rank in the origins sites or such. Could blend in some of the same tools as the current spotlight searches also
I switched all my default search to DuckDuckGo a few years ago.
But some searches still require Google for best results.
I avoid Yahoo and Bing, they are ugly.
afrodri wrote: »
Google AdWords setups offer pay-per-click or pay-per-impression. I think the default and most common is pay-per-click. Lots of people do click on them, hence Google's revenue.
revenant wrote: »
search engines are getting so much better that google's crown may be passed in a few years. i stopped using it a while back- i was tired of seeing the same dang advertisements every single time, or flooded with new ones all about the same friggen thing. just because i googled rolex watches does not mean i need to bombarded with links and images to sellers of the watch.
SpamSandwich wrote: »
At least Google is aware that their business could disappear in short order, thus the panic moves buying into weather balloon based Internet, robotics companies, self-driving cars... These are all wild bets.