In 2021, Google paid Apple about $18 billion to ensure its search engine remained the default choice on iPhones. At the same time, Google was quietly devising a plan to counter Apple's search ambitions.
Google has been exploring ways to beat Spotlight, Apple's iPhone search engine, by creating its own version for the iPhone, and is encouraging more users to use Google's Chrome browser instead of Safari, according to internal documents obtained by The New York Times . At the same time, Google is exploring new European laws to challenge Apple's control of the iPhone.
The search giant is expected to enter its defense in the antitrust trial soon. Google has previously argued that its popularity is due to quality and innovation, not default agreements. However, documents reveal that the company recognized the influence of defaults in guiding users to a product and tried to change how Apple chose Safari as the default web browser for iPhones.
Besides paying, Google has many strategies to help maintain its dominance in the search market.
In early 2022, Google was looking for ways to reduce its reliance on the Safari browser and use new European laws to challenge Apple's software ecosystem. The European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) aims to give smaller companies a chance to compete with big tech companies, forcing the likes of Apple to open up their platforms to competitors.
Google saw an opportunity to gain search market share by lobbying European regulators for access to Apple’s operating system. The company estimated that if users had to choose a browser, the number of iPhone users in Europe could triple to Chrome, allowing Google to retain more of its search advertising revenue.
Google’s quest to protect its dominance in the search business has highlighted the fierce competition between tech giants and the complexities of industry partnerships. The outcome of the antitrust trial could have important implications for the future of search engine competition and the relationship between big tech companies.
Source link
Comment (0)