Talk of an Apple Search Engine To Thwart Google 276
Hugh Pickens writes "eWeek reports that the data Apple collects about users from its iPhone is so valuable that the company may build its own iPhone-centric search engine just to keep Google from gleaning insight from that data. 'The data generated on the iPhone OS platform must become an increasing priority for Apple and we believe the company has the resources to develop its own products in both maps and search in the next five years,' writes analyst Gene Munster. Google is currently the default search engine on the iPhone, but Google has increasingly encroached on Apple's mobile turf, offering the Android operating system and several mobile applications. As the search provider for the iPhone, Google sees what iPhone users are searching for, which can help it tailor software and services for its own mobile smartphones — a competitive advantage that has not gone unnoticed by Apple. Apple lacks the experience and engineering wherewithal to build a large, scalable search engine, but Munster says Apple could buy a search startup with a Web index, such as Cuil or Taptu, and use its index as the seed for its own search engine. 'Apple is in an inside position to tap into the current pent-up demand for better mobile search, and add a new competitive differentiation from other search providers and device makers,' adds IDC analyst Hadley Reynolds."
Re:Balderdash! (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, Google seems to be exploring the possibility of tailoring their OS to a tablet... ...ChromeOS though, not Android
http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/user-experience/form-factors/tablet [chromium.org]
(but I think I remember some nafucaturers which showed Android-powered tablets at one of recent industry shows)
Re:This will fail (Score:5, Informative)
Gene Munster is a hack (Score:5, Informative)
This is the same guy [google.com] who says Apple is going to put out an HDTV, too.
He's like a stopped clock that tweets two times a day -- everyone should stop paying any attention to him. Just don't look! [kottke.org]
Re:Disregarding core competencies always ends badl (Score:3, Informative)
Not going into all the rest, but IBM's "foray"? Just off the top of my head, IBM more or less invented the "Personal Computer" as such, as the smaller version of mainframes and minicomputers (hence the term "microcomputer". Note: Altair, Apple IIe, etc. were "hobbyist/home computers" in their day). Microsoft originally supplied exclusively to IBM, and Intel was a spin-off, too. And this is consistent with IBM's strategy throughout the last decades: as soon as something looks as if it's heading in the direction of becoming a commodity, they drop it. Hard disks, for example. And they always do it early. IBM drops PCs - enter Dell; IBM drops hard disks - enter SSDs; always quite a few years down the line. IBM appears not the be interested in playing the margin game with n different competitors.
OK, now back to the rest: bullshit. Disregarding core competencies is a necessary part of progress. The Newton was closer to Apple's core competence that the iPod, when they came out, and we know which failed and which succeeded. Or the iPhone - damn, was that a saturated market when they started out, never having built a phone before.
Re:No Way (Score:2, Informative)
Bill Gates is still chief software architect and non-executive chairman of Microsoft and I'm sure he has some saying over things. He only stepped down from the chief executive officer position and maybe day to day activities and left those for Ballmer.