That's what I'm really hoping they do. My issue with non-Google search sites are the generally unappealing interfaces, particularly when it comes to image searches. Getting Bing's results filtered & organized through an Apple-designed front end would be the best!
In my opinion the value added is in the "database", that is built by the web crawlers. Today there are only a few web crawler engines at planetary level: GoogleBot (US), BingBot (US), Yandex (RU), Baidu (CH). Other famous search engines, like Yahoo and also DDG of course, receive data from them. So, there is no need to purchase DDG, it is much easier to negotiate access to data from MS, just like Yahoo, and to brand it as AppleSearch.
50 percent??? That seems awfully optimistic for Google. I find it highly unlikely a full half of users would manually switch their search engine back to Google.
If this did indeed pan out, then Google would probably start an ad-blitz of how to switch back to Google on iOS!
Off-but-on-topic PS: For starters, I'd be happy if Spotlight would simply find files I'm looking for. It misses most - even ones I'm LOOKING AT in Finder - so I'm just copying the name or keywords that I'm looking at to test - and it just comes up piles of crap that seem to bear little to no relation to the search terms.
Shockingly bad.
I am yet to figure out Spotlight as well. For something that is just supposed to work, it is frustrating to look for something with it. I probably need to spend some time playing with it, but as of now I dread having to search for a file on my Mac.
It's probably easier to setup an Automator Folder Action than get Spotlight working.
UBS is correct if in fact Apple cuts that final cord with Google about half the people will switch back to google, however, i believe that will be short lived, until the next iOS and phone refresh and people could not be bother to switch back to google. I know when the whole map thing happen people loaded google maps but today, most people just default to Apple maps and do not bother with Google maps.
Well I don't agree with that. I never use Apple Maps, because in Belgium, where I live, it is clearly inferior to Google Maps and because it does not run on all my devices and computers. A nice thing of Google is that when I have typed an address in the search bar of my browser on my Mac or PC, Google remembers this when I launch Google Maps on my iPhone, so I don't have to type the address twice.
I imagine the same thing will happen to search. As long as other search engines are not as good as Google, I will stick to Google. And currently Bing, Yahoo or DDG or no match for Google for Belgian content. This might be of course different in other regions, but one of the strenghts of any Google service is its global reach.
Siri is for the same reasen rather useless in Belgium, because it does not understand any spoken address, does not support Dutch and is unaware of any Belgian content. On the contrary, Google Now is localized and works quite OK in Belgium (although there is definitely room for improvement).
Well I don't agree with that. I never use Apple Maps, because in Belgium, where I live, it is clearly inferior to Google Maps and because it does not run on all my devices and computers. A nice thing of Google is that when I have typed an address in the search bar of my browser on my Mac or PC, Google remembers this when I launch Google Maps on my iPhone, so I don't have to type the address twice.
I imagine the same thing will happen to search. As long as other search engines are not as good as Google, I will stick to Google. And currently Bing, Yahoo or DDG or no match for Google for Belgian content. This might be of course different in other regions, but one of the strenghts of any Google service is its global reach.
Siri is for the same reasen rather useless in Belgium, because it does not understand any spoken address, does not support Dutch and is unaware of any Belgian content. On the contrary, Google Now is localized and works quite OK in Belgium (although there is definitely room for improvement).
The same goes for Swiss German, Siri understands high German without issues but the second I switch to Swiss German, which is what I use on a daily basis, forget it, Siri just doesn't understand. Google however amazingly does, it even understands my cousins weird Basel accent. Maps, I like Nokia's solution, especially on my Nokia 2520, it's one of the few apps that allows you to download an entire countries map for free. The GPS driving system is fantastic as well and since the map is localized on the computer, a network connection isn't required.
UBS is correct if in fact Apple cuts that final cord with Google about half the people will switch back to google, however, i believe that will be short lived, until the next iOS and phone refresh and people could not be bother to switch back to google. I know when the whole map thing happen people loaded google maps but today, most people just default to Apple maps and do not bother with Google maps.
Well I don't agree with that. I never use Apple Maps, because in Belgium, where I live, it is clearly inferior to Google Maps and because it does not run on all my devices and computers. A nice thing of Google is that when I have typed an address in the search bar of my browser on my Mac or PC, Google remembers this when I launch Google Maps on my iPhone, so I don't have to type the address twice.
I imagine the same thing will happen to search. As long as other search engines are not as good as Google, I will stick to Google. And currently Bing, Yahoo or DDG or no match for Google for Belgian content. This might be of course different in other regions, but one of the strenghts of any Google service is its global reach.
Siri is for the same reasen rather useless in Belgium, because it does not understand any spoken address, does not support Dutch and is unaware of any Belgian content. On the contrary, Google Now is localized and works quite OK in Belgium (although there is definitely room for improvement).
In Belgium it indeed kinda sucks. It is much better though in The Netherlands . And Siri is supporting Dutch and Polish in the latest beta so who knows what next updates are going to bring us.
Just what's wrong with Google search? I don't get so many ads and I find their search algos work for me. So what if they scrape my data and use that to ad me.
Google appreciates your apathy.
Me, I prefer not to be under constant digital surveillance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by singularity
then don't be online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz
There are ways for the non-ignorant to protect themselves from digital intrusion.
(Not using Google is a good first step.)
@RedHotFuzz: exactly! First things (or steps) first.
Me, I prefer not to be under constant digital surveillance
Then you shouldn't even be on this site, much less 99% of the internet altogether. At least Google's only interest is delivering ads for products that might actually interest you. Aren't you curious what the other 60+ trackers that load on just this page alone are after and what they do with it? It always amazes me when someone picks out one tree and assumes that's the whole forest.
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:
When you are actually seeking a product, you will click. That's the thing. These clicks are not really done by people doing general searches. The more precise the search, the more expensive the adword budget will be. Why? Because if you do a precise search, you probably need something very specific and are ready to buy it. Instead of say, just looking.
Comments
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.
I think I agree that Google's search results may be more comprehensive than DuckDuckG0, but almost always in the sense that they are more commercial.
About the time - a few years ago - that I allowed myself to be flabbergasted and impressed at Google's ability
to present a wealth of useful information, results seemed to become more and more noticeably private interest-based,
and markedly less edifying-information-based.
So any "comprehensive" advantage Google may currently possess is just about a push, at least for me, with DDG's priorities,
and I think I've only resorted to re-searching a question in Google once in the past few months.
Billions seems like a lot to bet on the laziness of people in neglecting to make a simple setting choice Apple makes easy.
?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video ?Video
Tim buy DDG and make it better.
Compete with YouTube.
Screw Giggle.
OMG my post count is a palindrome starting with 13, my lucky number. Tim, I'm available! ... wait .. I'm talking about being paid for my comments only
Shit my next post screwed that up.
So iSearch next year and iTube in 2018?
Could be.
No i just ? ... come on get with the program.
Can you imagine the drop in Giggle's revenue?
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz
50 percent??? That seems awfully optimistic for Google. I find it highly unlikely a full half of users would manually switch their search engine back to Google.
If this did indeed pan out, then Google would probably start an ad-blitz of how to switch back to Google on iOS!
Off-but-on-topic PS: For starters, I'd be happy if Spotlight would simply find files I'm looking for. It misses most - even ones I'm LOOKING AT in Finder - so I'm just copying the name or keywords that I'm looking at to test - and it just comes up piles of crap that seem to bear little to no relation to the search terms.
Shockingly bad.
I am yet to figure out Spotlight as well. For something that is just supposed to work, it is frustrating to look for something with it. I probably need to spend some time playing with it, but as of now I dread having to search for a file on my Mac.
It's probably easier to setup an Automator Folder Action than get Spotlight working.
Nah. Screw any and all support of the company.
UBS is correct if in fact Apple cuts that final cord with Google about half the people will switch back to google, however, i believe that will be short lived, until the next iOS and phone refresh and people could not be bother to switch back to google. I know when the whole map thing happen people loaded google maps but today, most people just default to Apple maps and do not bother with Google maps.
Well I don't agree with that. I never use Apple Maps, because in Belgium, where I live, it is clearly inferior to Google Maps and because it does not run on all my devices and computers. A nice thing of Google is that when I have typed an address in the search bar of my browser on my Mac or PC, Google remembers this when I launch Google Maps on my iPhone, so I don't have to type the address twice.
I imagine the same thing will happen to search. As long as other search engines are not as good as Google, I will stick to Google. And currently Bing, Yahoo or DDG or no match for Google for Belgian content. This might be of course different in other regions, but one of the strenghts of any Google service is its global reach.
Siri is for the same reasen rather useless in Belgium, because it does not understand any spoken address, does not support Dutch and is unaware of any Belgian content. On the contrary, Google Now is localized and works quite OK in Belgium (although there is definitely room for improvement).
Well I don't agree with that. I never use Apple Maps, because in Belgium, where I live, it is clearly inferior to Google Maps and because it does not run on all my devices and computers. A nice thing of Google is that when I have typed an address in the search bar of my browser on my Mac or PC, Google remembers this when I launch Google Maps on my iPhone, so I don't have to type the address twice.
I imagine the same thing will happen to search. As long as other search engines are not as good as Google, I will stick to Google. And currently Bing, Yahoo or DDG or no match for Google for Belgian content. This might be of course different in other regions, but one of the strenghts of any Google service is its global reach.
Siri is for the same reasen rather useless in Belgium, because it does not understand any spoken address, does not support Dutch and is unaware of any Belgian content. On the contrary, Google Now is localized and works quite OK in Belgium (although there is definitely room for improvement).
The same goes for Swiss German, Siri understands high German without issues but the second I switch to Swiss German, which is what I use on a daily basis, forget it, Siri just doesn't understand. Google however amazingly does, it even understands my cousins weird Basel accent. Maps, I like Nokia's solution, especially on my Nokia 2520, it's one of the few apps that allows you to download an entire countries map for free. The GPS driving system is fantastic as well and since the map is localized on the computer, a network connection isn't required.
DDG All the way.
In Belgium it indeed kinda sucks. It is much better though in The Netherlands . And Siri is supporting Dutch and Polish in the latest beta so who knows what next updates are going to bring us.
Quote:
Just what's wrong with Google search? I don't get so many ads and I find their search algos work for me. So what if they scrape my data and use that to ad me.
Google appreciates your apathy.
Me, I prefer not to be under constant digital surveillance.
then don't be online.
There are ways for the non-ignorant to protect themselves from digital intrusion.
(Not using Google is a good first step.)
@RedHotFuzz: exactly! First things (or steps) first.
Then you shouldn't even be on this site, much less 99% of the internet altogether. At least Google's only interest is delivering ads for products that might actually interest you. Aren't you curious what the other 60+ trackers that load on just this page alone are after and what they do with it? It always amazes me when someone picks out one tree and assumes that's the whole forest.
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:
When you are actually seeking a product, you will click. That's the thing. These clicks are not really done by people doing general searches. The more precise the search, the more expensive the adword budget will be. Why? Because if you do a precise search, you probably need something very specific and are ready to buy it. Instead of say, just looking.