Microsoft Discussed Selling Bing To Apple as Google Replacement (bloomberg.com) 25
Microsoft discussed selling its Bing search engine to Apple around 2020, a deal that would have replaced Google as the default option on the iPhone maker's devices, Bloomberg News reported Friday, citing people with knowledge of the matter. From the report: Executives from Microsoft met with Apple's services chief, Eddy Cue, who brokered the current search engine relationship with Alphabet's Google, to discuss the possibility of acquiring Bing, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the situation was confidential. The talks were exploratory and never reached an advanced stage, they said.
Over the years, the companies have discussed other ways to make Bing the preferred option, though Apple ultimately stuck with Google. Those talks have taken on fresh significance now that the US Department of Justice is in a legal fight with Google to show that the company abused its search dominance. Apple's relationship with Google, which pays billions of dollars to give its search engine a prime spot in the iPhone and other devices, is central to the case.
Over the years, the companies have discussed other ways to make Bing the preferred option, though Apple ultimately stuck with Google. Those talks have taken on fresh significance now that the US Department of Justice is in a legal fight with Google to show that the company abused its search dominance. Apple's relationship with Google, which pays billions of dollars to give its search engine a prime spot in the iPhone and other devices, is central to the case.
Well at least Apple would have given a better name (Score:1)
Maybe "Dung", going with that bell theme.
Re: (Score:3)
I was thinking "Bong"
Re: (Score:2)
To go back and get a better counteroffer from Google.
Re: (Score:1)
Buying Bing would have been a bone-head
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
In my recent limited testing, the first 10 results of bing were all on topic and relevant. Google on the other hand returned off topic trash by the fifth result.
Re: (Score:2)
You can get unpaid placement results within the first 3 pages with Google?! Who are you bribing?
At some point the search engines realized it was better for them to ignore explicit search terms and dump out garbage to try to sell your eyes to more vendors. Bing might be better at. not doing that, but result quality is truly miserable for me.
have you used bing lately? (Score:2, Informative)
By MSFT's internal metrics it was as good as Google 1-2 years ago and they've continued to make it better. Now sure everyone knows that metrics don't capture everything, but it's hardly a "heaping pile of dogshit." Bing censors results less (see: the meme that Bing is for porn) though still more than I'd like.
Seriously, try it. Next tricky Google search you do where you think "wow I can't believe that worked" try it on Bing and see what happens. Not that I give two shits about Bing's marketshare but at leas
The only people that use Bing... (Score:1)
Are those folks on Windows that don't know how to change to Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
> satisfied DuckDuckGo user
https://kagi.com/ [kagi.com] ftw!
Why did it fall apart? (Score:2)
Did Apple want too much money to take that turd off their hands?
Re: (Score:2)
It was assuredly a better deal for Apple to take filthy lucre from Google rather than roll their own search engine. Not their core business and I doubt Apple would end up owning a significant share of the business over the long term. Like browsers, I believe search is close to a natural monopoly, at least things keep gravitating there regardless of what players are in the market.
Search engines usefulness is all over the map (Score:1)
In my experience there isn't one search engine that is so generally good I don't need other search engines.
In their efforts to filter out results for sites that stream films or Netflix series for free big commercial engines like Google also wiped out search results of some false positives that had the misfortune of having a similar name as those sites, despite existing for years before them.
Most arguments on search engine merits contribute nothing to helping people solve the actual challenges of finding thi
Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
Apple faced a decition between spending money buying bing + The added hassle and expenses to mantain it and do R&D ... Or keep geting an influx of money if they kept google as their search engine...
What surprises me is not that they kept google search. What really surprises me is that they went lone with the moneypit/disaster that was Apple Maps, instead of keeping goolemaps as well...
Or maybe, they learned their lesson with the apple maps fiasco, and when Microsoft came allong selling Bing apple said n
Re: (Score:2)
Except Google Maps wasn't great in all places, and Apple Maps was better in a lot of areas. These days, Apple Maps is quite a lot better, and using and having both is good.
Plus, Google wasn't willin
Buy it and rename it "iGoogle" (Score:1)
Honestly, Apple would be insane to buy Microsoft's second-rate search product, which hasn't gotten anywhere even with Microsoft artificially inflating statistics by paying people to use Bing. You can certainly see why Microsoft wants to unload that albatross.
Rebranding it as "iGoogle" would be refreshing entertainment.
Re: (Score:2)
You can certainly see why Microsoft wants to unload that albatross
An albatross is another word for a double eagle which is 3 under par, pretty good IMHO! It's a hole in one on a par 4 and a hole in 2 shots on a par 5, pretty good!
It's usually a burden for your opponents, not for yourself /s
Do not want (Score:2)
Just like nobody wanted a Zune.
Too bad they didn't sell it (Score:2)
I don't like Apple, but I like Microsoft even less. And if Apple had taken over Bing, they might have managed to make it good - or at least better.