Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Google Iphone Apple

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Talk of an Apple Search Engine To Thwart Google

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 04, 2010 @03:45PM (#31726420)

  • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Sunday April 04, 2010 @04:18PM (#31726630) Homepage Journal

    I didn't even know there was all this "pent-up demand for better mobile search" as the article claims.

    Did you guys know there was "pent-up demand for better mobile search"? Because I didn't know there was "pent-up demand for better mobile search".

    But if marketing giant IDC says there's "pent-up demand for better mobile search" it must be true. A respected marketing firm wouldn't make something like that up, after all.

    Now that I think about it, I have been feeling vaguely unsatisfied with my horribly deficient mobile search. Perhaps, if there was a better mobile search available, from a company that I really really trust and have positive feelings toward, I might have been aware of this pent-up demand before it became such a crisis.

    God DAMN that Google all to Hell for not meeting my mobile search needs and creating this untenable situation of pent-up demand.

    I wonder what other pent-up demands I have and needs for products and services that aren't being met that I'm not even aware of? I should probably read more Wired Magazine and other fine Conde Nast publications so I can find out about all the needs I have of which I am unaware! Maybe it's that damned AdBlock Plus that is preventing me from learning about my unmet needs! I better turn that off right now!

  • by kitsunewarlock (971818) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @04:34PM (#31726754) Journal
    Bing isn't another search engine. Its a decision engine. Specifically, it drives many to decide to go to google instead of using their in-browser search functions.
  • by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @04:42PM (#31726808)
    I don't see how this would be useful - an Apple search engine would only return ONE result.
  • by ClosedSource (238333) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @05:21PM (#31727102)

    when we start hearing that Apple created search too.

  • by nEoN nOoDlE (27594) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @06:03PM (#31727374) Homepage

    But it would be the one you wanted but never knew you did

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 04, 2010 @06:15PM (#31727456)

    It will look for what it thinks you want rather than what you want

  • by gig (78408) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @06:21PM (#31727496)

    I'm tired of Google's 10 obfuscated links per query. You have to do a lot of mental calculation to determine if that's the link you want in many cases. It's actually really opaque. Apple would create a search engine for consumers and make it a much better experience. Guaranteed they would come in with some kind of twist that make Google Search look like a hand-cranked antique. They would likely also leverage their very extensive video knowledge (not just selling in iTunes, but also QuickTime, which is like the Unix of video creation) so that you could find video effectively. They might even promote it as being for users who want to find video.

    Apple's Spotlight client search is much better than what you find on other platforms, so it isn't like they're starting from scratch. And iTunes has its own built-in search engine. A Web index is really just expanding their search.

    Google's weakness is that they're all Ph.D computer nerds and most consumers are not. That's why you see that Android is used overwhelmingly by computer nerds. Google has almost no designers and artists. Ask yourself why the 10 results don't show me a little thumbnail of the page, even if that comes in after the results, that would be much more helpful in a lot of cases. Why isn't there an option at least to turn that on? Apple's search would likely be very, very graphical.

    If you remember the flap recently where people were trying to login to Facebook from a page that was not Facebook but was the #1 Google result for "Facebook login" then realize that is a Google Fail right there. That is people just typing words in and taking the first result. They're not even pressing "I'm feeling lucky" which would take them right there, they're going to the 10 results and just picking the top one without reading. I've seen this behavior again and again when training users. That's how most people "use" Google. They barely scratch the surface. Apple doesn't have to compete with the whole thing, just that surface 0.01% that most users are using.

    Google is vulnerable on privacy with Eric Schmidt recently saying you don't have any, and with them turning on Buzz the way they did. In the same way that Apple doesn't have to make very much money on iTunes Store (because it sells devices that they make money on) they don't have to make very much money in search and ads. They can out-privacy Google easily.

    Google is vulnerable on copyright, where they recently pissed off every book author in the world, just as Apple is opening a bookstore.

    AdWords is great but it's a lot of work for the advertiser. Apple's customers are a very desirable demographic. If they can make an ad platform that lets you reach Apple users for less work and less money than AdWords, many people would be very interested in that. Only 1 in 10 PC's is a Mac, but 9 out of 10 high-end PC's is a Mac. What if there was some link to Apple's credit card database, so that if a user comes in to your site via an ad on Apple's search engine, they can pay with their iTunes account?

    Google is obviously just searching the Web. Apple can offer the iTunes Store, their native app platforms, for example, enabling you to find something in the print/iPad edition of TIME. They could even do some kind of peer-to-peer from their client platforms, where you find what you're looking for in the public folder of somebody else's Mac. Which every Mac already has. The Web is the common space of the digital world, not the whole digital world.

    And Apple has a higher market cap and more money in the bank than Google. You can't dismiss it when any company that is bigger than you comes into your space. When that company is on such a roll that people who want to knock them point to the Power Mac G4 Cube as their awesome failure, that is really something to be concerned with. The Cube predates the iPod that is so long ago, and it was a profitable product (although not very) and it enjoyed a very loyal and even cult following even years after they stopped making it. Many companies would love to

  • Re:No Way (Score:3, Funny)

    by Dan541 (1032000) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @07:10PM (#31727836) Homepage

    I can only image what features an Apple map is going to lack. Street names, actual Roads!!!

  • by CODiNE (27417) on Sunday April 04, 2010 @07:36PM (#31728064) Homepage

    Apple could market human waste, and we'd all hail it as revolutionary.

    That's the brown Zune you're thinking of. Let's you squirt at people.

  • by OnePumpChump (1560417) on Monday April 05, 2010 @01:22AM (#31730500)

    Bing was created mainly as an attack on Google and an attempt to get into the search business, not because Microsoft had something new to offer in search.

    Wrong. Microsoft's first legitimate innovation ever is Bing's video search's startling proficiency at finding porn. Google doesn't even come close.

  • Re:No Way (Score:2, Funny)

    by symbolset (646467) on Monday April 05, 2010 @02:01AM (#31730668) Journal

    Actually, we don't know what sort of voodoo Steve Jobs used on the media heads to get them to put their content on iTunes under fairly reasonable terms. They were still working PlaysForNow at the time. It must have been some persuasive stuff. I'm thinking Quicktime video of studio executives snorting heroin off the nether parts of recently dead OD'd boyband members, but that may be my imagination getting the best of me. Maybe it was simple consensual human/gerbil interaction. I'm sure it wasn't reason though - they don't understand the term.

    This part of the Book of Jobs will probably never be written. Some things are best left a mystery.

"Once they go up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department." -- Werner von Braun