Why Apple Is Going “Containment” Not “Thermonuclear” Against Google In iOS 6

I keep hearing people talking about Apple finally going “thermonuclear” on Google with the forthcoming iOS 6 mobile operating system. No, it hasn’t. In fact, there are good reasons why it can’t, though Apple is certainly exercising a much more subtle and smart containment strategy.

Themonuclearly Renewing With Google

The thermonuclear reference comes from the Steve Jobs biography written by Walter Isaacson, where Jobs was so upset about Google’s Android operating system — and the theft from Apple that he viewed it to be — that he said to Issacson in early 2010:

I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.

Maybe Jobs was willing to go thermonuclear on Android, but that didn’t translate into going thermonuclear on Google’s search products. As I explained last year, Jobs renewed search deals with Google even after making that statement, keeping Google as the default search provider. Even a deal on Maps was extended.

We know relatively little about the deals between Apple and Google (see also my letter to the FTC suggesting that maybe consumers should know about such deals). But we do know that at his angriest, Jobs didn’t lash out and boot Google.

Why Apple Can’t Dump Google

One reason Jobs likely didn’t dump Google was because he couldn’t, not easily, not in the face of consumer opinion.

However much love Apple users have for Apple’s products, that doesn’t equate to them having to hate Google or its products like Google Search. Most of us are not rabid fanboys in our consumer choices. Plenty don’t want to “pick a side” between Apple and Google but rather pick the best products from both. Heck, even rabid-Android haters out there still use Google Search.

They do that because Google Search is good. It has the highest marketshare in most counties around the world, including the US (China, Russia, South Korea and Japan are key exceptions). Google is consistently selected as a top search choice when consumer surveys appear, as with Pew Internet’s recent one.

Even Jobs himself set Google Search aside. That thermonuclear reference? This is what Jobs said immediately after it:

They are scared to death, because they know they are guilty. Outside of Search, Google’s products— Android, Google Docs— are s**t.

I bolded the key part, where Google Search gets excepted from his dismissal of other Google products.

Why Did You Change My Search Choice?

Let’s say that Apple did boot Google as the default search engine in favor of the only real alternative in the US, Microsoft’s Bing. What happens? For one, Apple’s simply swapped out one fierce competitor for another. More important, it makes that change at a serious risk that consumers of its devices might get upset.

Recall that Verizon had a deal with Microsoft to make Bing the default on its phones back in 2009 (it later turned out that Android was exempted). When Verizon started changing things around with BlackBerry devices, it faced customer outcry over the move.

There’s an excellent chance that if Apple switched the default search in Safari on iOS to Bing, people would freak out asking where Google was. Sure, they could change the default. But it would still put Apple in the uncomfortable position of having to explain why it chose not the best search engine to use as a default but rather one based on competition issues. That’s not something you want to do, when you’re a company known for creating great products that keep the user in mind.

That’s not to say that Google is the best search engine out there. We don’t have independent metrics that assess relevancy like this. Instead, it’s widespread consumer perception that Google is the best that Apple has to contend with (and that Bing currently struggles with). Making Bing the default would raise the issue in ways I think Apple wouldn’t like. Moreover, if search quality wasn’t as good, Apple would face some blame.

Containment, Not Thermonuclear War

If we’re going to drag out the Cold War references, then let’s remember that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union thankfully ever went thermonuclear on each other. While there was a mutually assured destruction threat that kept both sides in order, perhaps “containment” is the better Cold War reference to use when considering Apple’s war with Google.

With containment, the US sought to stop the spread of communism to countries around the world. Apple’s strategy with iOS is really to contain Googlism where it can and push it back slowly where it makes sense, especially in ways that this can be positioned as a consumer benefit.

When Siri launched on the iPhone 4S, it’s one of the few times I know of — perhaps the only time — where Apple shipped a “beta” product to consumers (as it still remains today). But it was a smart move, because it allowed Apple to begin containing Google in search on Apple’s own devices. Siri would decide where a search should go, and it didn’t always go to Google (side note: Google’s deal with Apple clearly didn’t anticipate or require Google be the default for voice search, only for Safari search).

That containment wasn’t something average consumers widely understood, I’d say. To them, Siri was just some cool new tool that let you ask your iPhone for stuff. It was a subtle way to dump Google without consumers ever realizing that Apple dumped Google.

The Siri Search Engine

Potentially, Apple could build its own search engine. Various people have been speculating on that for years. I’m dubious about it, because I’ve seen just how difficult it is for companies to do search at scale. It’s not Apple’s core strength, and it would face huge competition from both Google and Microsoft.

Should you believe owning devices or the operating system means you win in search, think again. Microsoft had all those advantages win it first tried to win in search in 1998 with MSN Search. Despite tie-ins to devices, the browser, the operating system and all Microsoft’s efforts over the years, people still sought out Google. Even starting from scratch three years ago with the new technology and brand of Bing, people still use Google as much as ever.

No, what you do if you’re Apple is what you’re already doing. You keep growing Siri to work with other search partners, to keep Google contained, to win away areas of search where you feel confident Google won’t be missed.

Eventually, maybe you launch an Apple search engine that’s a web-based version of Siri. Perhaps you even call it Siri and make it available through Siri.com. Over time, as Siri continues to grow with answers to popular searches from selected providers, you might eventually change the “backup” search engine that kicks in for when you don’t have a partner. Silently, Google gets replaced by Bing.

That’s how you fight Google, if you’re Apple. No bombs get dropped; no consumer is even aware that you were fighting a war.

How Badly Does This Hurt Google?

As for Google, would it have been smarter not to have sparked this war by getting into mobile devices at all? Perhaps. Some like John Gruber believe so. I often look at Google doing its own browser, operating systems, mobile devices and wonder myself if it would be a more successful company without so many powerful enemies if it has stuck more closely to its search roots.

But Google’s an incredibly paranoid company. It created a browser out of fear Microsoft would block its services. Going into mobile devices similarly gave it a defense against being cut out. Not that Google didn’t have offensive aims. But mobile is so increasingly tied into search that gambling on having your own mobile platform at the risk of alienating Apple may have still made sense.

We can do the shoulda, coulda, woulda debate for ages, as well as the who was working on mobile first argument. But however Apple and Google arrived at this situation, it’s fiercely competitive now. So what’s containment means for Google? In the short term, Google’s potentially not losing as much as seems.

It Depends On What’s Being Contained

Spoken queries are cool, do seem significant and are growing. On Android, where voice search has existed for longer than the iPhone, Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt said at the end of 2010 that about 25% of queries were done by voice. But are these queries Google makes money off of?

From an revenue perspective, it doesn’t hurt Google much if its Siri rather than Google that tells Zooey Deschanel that yes, that is rain falling outside her window. She wasn’t clicking on a Google ad to learn that, anyway.

People are using Siri for searches that aren’t easy to mock, of course, but exactly what is hard to say. We know Wolfram Alpha gets about 25% of its queries from Siri, but what percentage that is of all Siri searches isn’t known. Even if that’s a big chunk, it’s mostly reference information that Google isn’t likely to earn off of.

We know that with Google, anywhere from 13% to 33% of voice searches may be local-related. If that holds true with Siri, those are potentially valuable searches that are being lost. But then again, in the way Siri currently routes local searches, no one — not Yelp, Apple or Google — seem to be making much money. That’s because those searches ultimately end up just showing phone numbers and addresses.

Maps: How Much A Google Loss?

That leads to the new Maps. A big loss for Google! Make no mistake, Google was concerned about it enough to hold a special pre-emptive mapping event last week. When iOS 6 comes out, no doubt we’ll see an actual Google Maps application that doesn’t exist now.

But how much does being dumped out of Maps hurt Google? Let’s recall how Google benefits from that now. Here I’ve done a search on Maps for restaurants, which brings up pins that lead to phone numbers and addresses:

It’s hard to see how much money Google is losing by being booted out of this, especially compared to how things work when you do the same thing using the Google Maps app on Android:

Now you’re being directed to a page on Google Local (er, Google+ Local) where Google has easier monetization opportunities.

This is going to change, of course. The new Maps will have ”Info Cards” for 100 million businesses, and we got a brief look at these during the keynote. Here’s an image from VentureBeat’s coverage:

Credit: VentureBeat

Most interesting is the “Reviews” tab, a place where if Google had better relations with Apple, perhaps it might have been able to help populate and monetize. In the US, this partnership now goes to Yelp.

But in the near term, even the new Maps with Info Cards doesn’t seem to immediately cut into Google financially. There’s even potential that if Google does win users to its own Google Maps app, the company might do a bit better than it does now on iOS.

Google is going to lose the data about what people search for through Maps, data that might be useful to the company in many ways. However, Google still has lots of local data coming in from Android. It may also continue to get local data from iOS devices if people choose to use a Google Maps app there.

It’s Complicated

I keep talking about “near term,” because that’s the reality check needed here. No mushroom cloud just went off to vaporize Google. In the near term, Apple’s containment strategy doesn’t seem likely to have an explosive effect on Google.

It gets even more complicated to assess when you consider other factors. For example, if you search on Google now using Safari and get shopping results, those don’t generate revenue for Google (and thus potentially for Apple, if Apple’s paid off of ad revenues). But later this year, all of Google’s shopping results will effectively become ads.

This means that even though Google might see fewer queries coming from iOS devices, Google may still make more money off those queries. Here’s another twist. Some of those listings — the ones that appear when people search directly on Google Shopping rather than getting links in a “Sponsored” shopping box — might not be considered ads. Rather than having to share that revenue with Apple (if that’s the agreement now), Google might keep it all.

That make your head hurt? Sorry. The world of paid inclusion is a tricky space. It gets more confusing when we don’t know the terms of Google pays Apple for searches. Factor in further confusion in that we’re still discovering how people really search on the iPhone in the wake of Siri.

Consider this survey that Search Engine Land corresponding editor Greg Sterling did recently:

He did that using the Google Consumer Surveys service. It suggests, as I wrote before, that there’s a strong loyalty or at least habit of going to Google directly.

Stay tuned. We’ll be digging further into whatever we can dig up on consumer search habits with the iPhone and the iPad. It’s another important piece to the puzzle about how all this plays out.

Breaking Up Is Hard To Do

For the near term, Google looks to remain the default in Safari for most of the countries where the iPhone and iPad are sold, and that leaves it pretty integrated into iOS. Siri might snip it out of some spoken queries, but it seems likely there will be plenty of valuable long-tail traffic Google will keep getting along with plenty of important “head” traffic.

No doubt, Google would like to have the deep OS integration that Twitter has now and Facebook will get. I’d actually, as a user, like to have that as well. I get that type of thing on my Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy S II Android phones. I think iOS would be a better operating system if I, the user, get a choice about easily adding social systems I want to share with. But Google not being invited to that party may not be the disaster that some are predicting.

Long term is a completely different issue. As containment continues, Google could and probably will see deeper cuts that hurt. But I wouldn’t count it out. Even if a Siri search engine emerges from Apple, there are still reasons why consumers might deliberately seek Google.

Also remember that Apple is discovering some of the downsides that come with being a search engine. Anyone remember when Apple was being attacked for “Siri’s” abortion results or “Siri” saying that there were better smartphones than the iPhone? That was really down to how results came from its partners, but Apple still got blamed for them. The more Siri directly seems to answer things, the worse that’s going to get.

Ask Google. It’s not fun being a search engine when results get called into question. It’s especially not fun if eventually some company that doesn’t get to be your partner decides it’s time to launch an anti-trust complaint against your alleged dominance in the mobile space and how you’re leveraging it against them. That could happen.

Looking at all that, Apple might decide that it makes sense to stay with Google in various ways. After all, Google seems to be generating hundreds of millions to perhaps billions of dollars for it. Google’s almost certainly generating more revenue for Apple than any other search partner and has a proven record (that’s important; ask Yahoo how that Bing deal worked out). I wonder if Google is potentially one of Apple’s biggest revenue-generating partners period?

Maybe we’ll be able to ferret out more about that. But suffice to say, Google’s a major trading partner with Apple. You don’t go thermonuclear on a trading partner, not if they’re making you plenty of money and you can try to maintain an upper-hand in other ways.

Related Articles

Related Topics: Apple | Apple: Maps | Apple: Siri | Channel: Mobile | Features: Analysis | Google: Android | Google: Business Issues | Google: Maps & Local | Google: Mobile | Top News

Sponsored


About The Author: is a Founding Editor of Search Engine Land. He’s a widely cited authority on search engines and search marketing issues who has covered the space since 1996. Danny also serves as Chief Content Officer for Third Door Media, which publishes Search Engine Land and produces the SMX: Search Marketing Expo conference series. He has a personal blog called Daggle (and keeps his disclosures page there). He can be found on Facebook, Google + and microblogs on Twitter as @dannysullivan.

Connect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn



SearchCap:

Get all the top search stories emailed daily!  

Share

Other ways to share:
 

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion. Comments using foul language, being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion will be deleted. Comments may also be removed if they are posted from anonymous accounts. You can read more about our comments policy here.
  • Pierre Gardin

    “ Sure, they could change the default. But it would still put Apple in the uncomfortable position of having to explain why it chose not the best search engine to use as a default but rather one based on competition issues.”

    No, they couldn’t. If you had researched your subject you would have learned why.

  • http://www.thenetworkgarden.com hypermark

    Great analysis. I have two points to add. One is that it seems logical that Apple is going to focus on the areas where they can create better native experiences than a simple web experience offers. Put another way, Apple has ALWAYS bifurcated their approach between Mobile Web and Mobile Native.

    Hence, standard web based search as it exists today, is fast and functional, so there’s only downside to disrupting satisfied users. Pick a partner, get out of the way.

    Map based search, by contrast, is an area where not only was Apple already creating value by building their ideal form of interaction and visualization, it’s an area where being “native” makes a serious difference. Own it and evolve it.

    Voice based search, too, is an area where the interface, response and return functions need to be highly evolved to support incredibly complex interactions and deliver intelligent returns either visually, aurally or at a service level (add to calendar,email me). Heavily native. Own it, evolve it.

    The second takeaway I had re iOS 6 is that iOS starts to gain more of a portal like flavor where Apple plugs in default partners for various function sets (Yelp, OpenTable and Rotten Tomatoes, Waze), and it will be interesting to see how that evolves for them as a monetization strategy.

    Btw, if you are interested, here was my analysis of the WWDC Keynote (http://bit.ly/iOS6-WWDC-Keynote).http://

  • http://www.darnellclayton.com Darnell Clayton

    Siri is much more emotional than Google but when it comes to voice searches online it produces less relevant results as I’ve found Google’s voice app is able to grasp what I’m saying much better than Siri (as the former can understand different accents, something Siri seems to have a problem with).

    Maps for iOS 6 looks sweet for Apple, but if Google launches their own standalone I’ll switch. Why? Accuracy.

    Maps iOS is based upon companies Apple bought, but they have incorporated data from OpenStreet Maps as well as licensed information from TomTom.

    While this makes them as competitive (if not better) than bing maps or Ask.com maps, the fact that Google physically travels the road pretty much sums up why I (along with a sizable chunk of others) will dump iOS 6 maps for a future Google Maps app as accuracy is key in this game.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    I did. It’s called Settings > Safari > Search Engine. For my iPhone 4S, I can choose to change the default from Google to Yahoo or Bing.

    I think you interpreted as what I wrote meaning that Apple might drop Google as one of the embedded choices. I doubt they’d do that so much it didn’t occur to me to make that clear. When I talk about drop, I mean dropping Google as the selected default, not as a choice among the defaults.

    Apple would be insane to not offer Google as an option, I’d say.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    Looks like you’ve edited your comment now, so that my doesn’t make much sense. You’d initially ended by saying, “No, they couldn’t. If you had researched your subject you would have learned why.”

    I took that to mean you felt I hadn’t researched some technical issue. Now it sounds like you think I wasn’t aware there’s an Apple-Google deal. It’s pretty self-evident from the piece that I was aware of this. But the piece starts out talking about how the deal was renewed, and it doesn’t always have to be renewed. At some point, Apple could drop Google as the default choice, when the deal (or deals) have expired.

  • http://twitter.com/darrinlim Darrin Lim

    Another thing that Google has going for it is internationalisation.  
    I’m in New Zealand – Siri doesn’t recognise my accent and the business reviews in Apple Maps and Siri are useless because Yelp doesn’t operate here.  
    No such issues with Google.  And if they switch to Bing, that’s just as bad – it doesn’t have an NZ-specific version.
    Apple always seems to forget they also operate outside of the US.  We don’t even have an Apple Store here!

  • Dorothy N. Nelson

    I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this. http://DemoforFrank.blogspot.com

  • PittsGeorge

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Cash&#76azy.com

  • Durant Imboden

    Yes, and people might actually use the option, as they do when they choose Google as their default search engine in Microsoft’s Internet Explorer.

  • Alan

    Whilst I wish they would I have to agree that Apple will not be firing any nukes at Google in the near future. However in the war Google and Apple WILL have (or are having) containment is definitely a better strategy FOR NOW. 

    However I am pretty sure Google and Apple now consider each other enemies and are just operating under the strategy of keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. 

    Apple is the worst kind of enemy to have! Why? Because they apparently have cash reserves bigger than the US federal reserve and are willingness to act ruthlessly if threatened.

    Just because they are moving slowly and eating at google from the edges doesn’t mean they won’t one day go for the jugular! It is a strategy most big tech companies employ. In fact Google is employing the strategy against Facebook as we speak. How many attempts did they have at taking on Facebook head on? 5 times? That didn’t work! So now they are forcing everyone to use G+ even when we don’t want to. Will this succeed where all other attempts failed? time will tell. 

    other leaders in their field that were taken out by concerted opposition:

    Microsoft vs ICQ
    Microsoft vs Netscape
    Microsoft vs OS2
    Google vs Hotmail
    Google vs Yahoo Search
    Google vs Altavista
    Facebook vs Myspace

    Just to name a few. Is Google to big to fail? I don’t believe any company is to big to fail. The search results Google is offering at the moment are quite bad, Which is unusual for them and with the advent of paid listings the above the fold user experience is only going to get worse. So I think they are ripe ready to be knocked off the mantle of the best search engine the world has ever known. All a competitor has to do is provide uncluttered results that are geo-targeted. How hard could that be ? ;)

    Personally I think Apple should just buy out someone like duckduckgo and put some of that mount everest of cash they have into making it even better.

    However like I have said before why stop at search? Why not offer Apple’s own version of adwords and adsense. Google seems to be making money from those two products. So why couldn’t Apple? If there is one thing we know Apple isn’t averse to making money!

    In the end I don’t hate Google I just want some real competition in the market place to keep Google on their toes and maybe start treating publishers like human beings instead of old corn cobs they have eaten all the kernels off of.

  • JohnDoey

    You are misunderstanding the mapping issue slightly, I think. The Maps app is only one of tens of thousands of iOS apps that use Apple’s mapping API’s on iOS. Google Maps are not just going to be replaced in the Maps app; they are going to be replaced in every map in every app on iOS. The apps ask the system for a map and the system returns one, which today uses Google data. At some point in the near future, apps will ask the system for a map and the map they get will be an Apple map and Google Maps will be an Android feature only.

    > For the near term, Google looks to remain the default in Safari
    > for most of the countries where the iPhone and iPad are sold,
    > and that leaves it pretty integrated into iOS.

    That is not really true. In the next versions of both Mac OS and iOS, the search bar in Safari is a single field. There is no Google Search field. If you enter a search term in the single field, you get an Apple-provided menu (not Google-provided as before with Suggest) that includes the Siri partners and then finally, Google. It is a huge demotion.

    Google are definitely getting removed from the partner lounge and being shown outside to the competitor’s lounge.

    I think this is all much worse for Google than even their worst detractors would say, because they specifically went to war with OS X and NT and it turns out we are having another OS X and NT decade, only this time, on iPods. Most of Google’s users will continue to be running either OS X or NT, and their Web browsers are going to be the 3rd or 4th place they go for search. Facebook and Twitter are going to be all through the interface, along with Siri and Spotlight and Bing, and Google users are just going to be the small number of people who both a) have an Android phone and b) use it for something other than a phone. The actual computing is happening — as usual — on OS X (Mac OS and iOS) and NT (on Wintel and soon on ARM.) Nobody else even has a native app platform, and that is the #1 feature that consumers want in a PC.

  • Alan

    What I find funny in all this is that apparently Microsoft nets more from Android devices than Google does. So they went to war with Apple to fill Microsoft’s coffers? Next time Google decides to “go to war” against another big fish. They really should check out who owns all the bullets.. err I mean patents.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/3A2MSZTLIGQW6P5M2TSXT4UNOY Sharlene

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Cas&#104Lazy.com

  • http://vfmvn.com.vn/ Duy Nguyen

    Alan, this is the war of giants and I think they won’t let the other party outplay them easily. Let’s see what would happen then.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    Thanks. That developer aspect is an important one. But I suspect that beyond Maps itself, most of that traffic (and potential for Google to monetize) is relatively minor.

    I’ll be very curious to see that new Safari bar in action. That is a big difference, but it also seems likely to go against the deal for Google to be the primary provider. I’ll go on the hunt for some screenshots.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    Duck Duck Go depends on other search engines, primarily Bing. If Apple bought it, and it suddenly took off to be a threat to Bing, Bing could end that partnership.

  • Pierre Gardin

    I have edited my comment because I thought afterwards it was harsh and unfair, when I said you hadn’t researched your subject. I just felt that if someone read this article lightly, he would think that Apple did make Google the default to avoid alienate users, when in fact they got a double benefit.

  • Alan

    I guess they could buy bing then. Wasn’t MS trying to shop it to Facebook?

  • Gad Heilweil

    Great read.
    For me there is a larger strategic war going on: the web  vs the OS’s. The Web has been with us only for about 20 years yet we take it for granted, However we are seeing a move largely led by apple but to some extend MS and now also Samsung to pull away from the web and move consumers back to OS environments (whatever it maybe). This shift exemplified by Siri but to some extent in almost any other “social” app that is disconnected from the web, is thermonuclear for google but much more worrisome for me it will (and already is) nuke the web.  

  • Djyrn

    I started buying Apple products for my personal and business life back in 2007 when I adopted Google Apps for my company.  It was Google that truly enabled me to make the leap away from the PC/Server/Blackberry world.  

    I still experience more synergy with google and apple then not, I’ve not avoided Apple goods because of google but on the contrary I’ve used Apple rather than Windows as a result.  Apple should be wary about cutting Google’s throat as there’s an excellent chance that it will once again force the world to choose PC or Apple.  From a business perspective that’ll hurt Apple’s inroads, and steer many people off the course that’s been taking us to a post PC world.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000586876452 Arvin Alba

    You’re not even sure if Apple’s maps will be inaccurate! You haven’t even seen it! I’ll reserve my judgement until I’ve actually tested both.

  • http://www.darnellclayton.com Darnell Clayton

    Apparently iOS 6 maps is based upon TomTom. Seriously. Combine that with OpenStreet Maps and you get a “decent” app, but one that is not going to be as accurate as Google’s (apparently TomTom has a horrible reputation as far as mapping applications go. See: 
    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/06/ios-6-maps-app-challenges/ for details).

    I’m going to use Google Earth and wait until a standalone Google Maps app appears upon iOS. I’m not risking my life using an inferior mapping service (and if you have used OpenStreet Maps as well as TomTom, then you already know what iOS 6 Maps data isn’t going to be as accurate as Google Maps).

    I’m not saying Apple can’t do the job. I really do hope that they do put out a decent competitor. I was just hoping it would be better than what I’m hearing right now.

  • http://twitter.com/shrek79 shrek79

    Not as big of threat as people think. Only 4s and Iphone 5 will have access to all features of Imap, such as flyover and turn by turn. I think Apple is alienating some people by not supporting this on phones clearly capable to do this, I have Tom Tom and it works fine.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/VETSXLSQUQBFJW6X5ZUZOHJJLA Clinton

    as Francisco said I‘m surprised that anybody can profit $6342 in one month on the internet. did you look at this link  ===>> <a href="http://bit.ly/HVtSrx”>LazyCash38.com
     

  • sergeeva

    What is “california highway patrol” in Google’s app about Eat Chow? Is it relevant information about a place? Google’s information extraction seems to be very stupid. I browsed google local for many other restaurants and businesses and their “at a glance” is stupid irrelevant information in majority cases. In cases it’s relevant it’s meaningless too generic “salad”, “roasted chicken salad” item which can not be used to judge if this place is what you search for or not. What’s going up with Google local? Google Local is significantly beyond other google properties in search. Recently I searched “best buy” in Google and got Best Buy Headquarters instead of place in Palo Alto.

  • sergeeva

    Daniel
    do you have any information how much users use Google Maps vs Yelp now?
    From my friends in restaurant business I know that star rating at Yelp is significantly more important for them than star rating provided by Google, but I do not have numerical data. My general believe now – Google Map is not an app which important for users searches for businesses, they tend to use Yelp, but again I do not have any numerical data to confirm or reject this hypothesis.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/EH4QLYL3NBJCXOAQOSPXBQ46ZM Russell

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Cas&#104Lazy.com

  • http://www.webstatsart.com/ Webstats Art

    At the end of the day, they have all pocketed so much cash that none of these things really matter. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/4OPOUB5XQJLXKHEBKKPBI6YAEI Mike

    Apple needs Google needs Facebook needs Apple, etc. That’s what people need to understand. Apple has the cash to do literally whatever it wants but in theory it can’t. One corporation cannot dominate multiple markets. So in theory they all need each other. 

  • RasmussenElisabeth

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Cas&#104Lazy.com

  • zato

    Apple is almost certainly developing its own search engine. Apple can’t leave an enemy, Google, in control of an important part of its customer experience. 

  • VasquezNadine

    my buddy’s step-mother makes $62 hourly on the internet. She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her check was $20978 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read more here 

    ⇛⇛⇛⇛► (Click On My Name For Link)

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/WH2EMWX3BVSCSL6FOS42Q3FFTE Jaime

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Ca&#115hLazy.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/stuartlogan2002 Stuart Logan

    Bing was the default search on my iPad 3. Not seen any press on this though, so maybe it was only a UK deal?

  • http://www.facebook.com/isaiah.bollinger Isaiah Bollinger

    Apple should not be mad that Google may have stolen their operating system ideas.  There needs to be competition for better products to come about.  If anything Apple should make a search engine so that there is more search engine competition because honestly Bing and Yahoo are pretty awful considering how much money they have to throw at their stupid algorithms and search engine technology.  I started http://www.muvdigital.com and a few other projects very recently because I believed I could start a better company than other online marketing companies I had worked for and I hope we build our brand and products at a level that competes with other big companies.  Competition is critical to creating better products and services.  The world economy is desperately lacking competition as oligopolies and other huge corporations are dominating the markets because no one can compete with the money they can through at their marketing and product development ploys.  I hope more companies emerge and compete so that I dont have to get owned and take it by huge corporations just giving it to me with massive profit margins and poor delivery.  Without competition corporations have little incentive to improve their products and services to compete for market share.  America was built on competition yet there are less new businesses owners than ever before.  We must have more business owners to bring America back to what it once was. 

  • http://lazycash1.com/ Makemoneyonline.com

    my friend’s mother-in-law makes $85 every hour on the computer. She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her paycheck was $19177 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more her

    ⇛⇛⇛⇛► (Click Over My Name For Link)

  • Kizedek

    Nonsense. There is no Web vs App dilemma. That is all FUD. We now have more choices than ever. If this was 400 years ago, maybe you would be lamenting the rise of leaved books over scrolls. Yet, paper and the written word are still very much with us!

    The internet is there, period. It is there to be used. One way to use it is by accessing web pages through a browser. That is not going to change. 

    However, if you want real services and real interaction etc., then you are going to look for more native solutions. This is just another way to use the internet. The applications of native apps to real world use cases are limitless. Platforms for native apps are necessary to keep pushing the boundaries, making new things possible and providing some differentiation.

    The web / browser part of the internet needs to be as open and standardized as possible. It finally is becoming that way with HTML5, CSS3, PHP, javascript, etc. No, Flash and Silverlight were never the “real web”. Everyone is on equal footing there (unless they are slow to implement standards or they interpret them in some bizarre way of their own). True, it might become more like window shopping or getting a catalog in the mail; but if anything it will become more ubiquitous as every phone, every billboard etc. becomes web enabled.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GDCXM6BGPIBGY2RESIGHR5Y34E Celeste

    like Gloria explained I am blown away that any body able to get paid $8747 in four weeks on the computer. have you read this web page ===>> <a href="http://LazyCash38.com“>LazyCash38.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/Silks Yaniv Eidelstein

    In iOS 6, Apple chose Vimeo over YouTube. That’s almost as extreme as Bing over Google search.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/SGNTH4ERMYELIKO7TYF5LXC5GM Imogene

    My ńeighboŕ’s mŏther-iń-ląw Maḱes $8O houŕly on the laptoṗ. She has bėėn out of w0rḱ for 7 Ṁonths but ląst Ṁonth her ińcome wąs $8734 just worḱińg on thė laṖt0Ṗ for a ƒew hours. Gŏ to this web siṫe and ŕead morė.. Ca&#115hLazy.com

  • KyleBavender

    “I’m not risking my life using an inferior mapping service…”

    Not sure whether this hyperbolic statement was intentional (har har) or made in ignorance of the last several millenia of navigation technology.

  • http://www.darnellclayton.com Darnell Clayton

    @KyleBavender:disqus I guess you’ve never had to use a mapping service with friends and had it instruct you to turn down a road that either shouldn’t exist or had the wrong name, thus ending up in a bad neighborhood.

    I also have friends in the courier business who use mapping services like Google, Mapquest, etc. and can not afford to take the wrong path in a bad neighborhood (lest they get robbed).

    Google Maps isn’t perfect (and neither is Ask.com either. I won’t even mention Bing Maps here). But if you need to get to point A to point B without unnecessary scenic detours or contributing to “Robin Hoods” future estate, Google Maps is where it’s at for me.

  • Gad Heilweil

    u started with “nonsense” and ended with “true”

  • Kizedek

    lol. True.
    But still, I don’t think the app platform phenomena is nuking the web. My true statement was not about the web going backwards or conceding that it was being somehow sabotaged by apps, but that in *relation to* the new possibilities opened up by native platforms that can do so much more, web pages may fulfill a role that they are more suited to — instead of them doing anything and  everything that anyone could possibly ever want to do on the internet from here on out. Direct connections via native apps are just another way to access internet based services, but they are more suited or more appropriate for many kinds of services.

    It’s like complaining that mobile phones are nuking landline based phones. You’re still communicating, “calling” via a device. In that sense a phone is a phone (as an internet service is an internet service). The only difference is that people are making far more phone calls where ever they happen to be (and sending texts and everything else) because of mobile phones; and the convenience and the amount of communication taking place has grown exponentially.

  • http://richardwillia.ms/ Richard Williams

    “But are these queries Google makes money off of?”
    “…that Google isn’t likely to earn off of.”
    “and thus potentially for Apple, if Apple’s paid off of ad revenues”
    “…instead of old corn cobs they have eaten all the kernels off of.”

    Interesting article. For information, the word you’re looking for in the above quotes is “from” not “off of”!

  • http://www.statsprofessor.org/ StatsProfesor

    iOS 6 will be nothing more than features taken from Android.  Apple stopped innovating 5 years ago. iMaps looks like another beta app which is already getting negative feedback.

    Consumers want choice and that’s not what Apple intends to give them.

    Let us get excited about 4″ screens and LTE…..

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rob-Ainscough/100003134647371 Rob Ainscough

    Google search is far more productive/efficient for me.  I’ve used Bing and Yahoo and rarely do they get results I need quickly and listed in good relevance/priority.  iOS 6 will (as expected) break or handicap older devices … this is Apple’s way of forcing people to buy the latest devices.  This practice was done with the original 3G iPhone, MacPro 1,1 computers (will not work on OSX Mountain Lion) where a new iOS/OSX basically rendering devices useless … a device that “was” functioning perfectly.  Apple EOL hardware pretty rapidly.

    The “sandbox” in iOS (i.e. not permitting Flash and Silverlight and 3rd party browser add-ins, except Quicktime of course) is a serious step backwards and isn’t something consumers want. Sadly Microsoft are following the same route rather than thinking about what consumers really want.

    Technology wise, Apple is pretty tapped out … Siri slows me down, doesn’t make life easier, just the opposite … more frustration in repeating and doing many steps very “slowly” that can be accomplish is 1/100th of the time with one’s fingers.  We’re just not there yet for voice recognition, just don’t have the processing power in “mobile” devices (not even in desktop computers) — probably a good 20-30 years out before voice recognition becomes as efficient as one’s fingers.

    As far as Google and Android … we need competition, Apple’s business practices are positively scary and certainly NOT consumer/market driven any more.  The only sad part about this Google/Apple love/hate is that Microsoft aren’t thinking long term and pretty much do whatever Apple does in an attempt to “keep up” — this is going to be a real problem for Microsoft.  Microsoft should be taking this opportunity to drop Bing and support Google … both have a better chance together than going it alone.

  • Jamey Kirby

    Google does not need Apple anymore. Android has passed Apple in number of phones and Android sales are growing at staggering rates. The open distribution model for Android will kill Apple unless Mr. Cook opens the app platform as to not require marshal law in the Apple app domain.

  • Badal Ashar

    Youre right about competition. Apple has owned the tablet market due to the lag in Android resulting in a poor user experience with an android based tablet. Guess what.. that lag has been fixed. Check out the nexus 7. I expect a Nexus 10″ to be available within a year. I guess competition goes both ways and google could also go for Apples jugular.. he he.

Get Our News, Everywhere!

Daily Email:

Follow Search Engine Land on Twitter @sengineland Like Search Engine Land on Facebook Follow Search Engine Land on Google+ Get the Search Engine Land Feed Connect with Search Engine Land on LinkedIn Check out our Tumblr! See us on Pinterest

 
 

Click to watch SMX conference video

Join us at one of our SMX or MarTech events:

United States

Europe

Australia & China

Learn more about: SMX | MarTech


Free Daily Search News Recap!

SearchCap is a once-per-day newsletter update - sign up below and get the news delivered to you!

 


 

Search Engine Land Periodic Table of SEO Success Factors

Get Your Copy
Read The Full SEO Guide