Apple says 'there's no price Microsoft could pay' to make it ditch Google: "They offered to give us Bing for free"

Tim Cook
Apple CEO Tim Cook (Image credit: Source: Apple)

What you need to know

  • Apple says there's nothing Microsoft could offer to get it to switch from Google to Bing as the default search engine in Safari.
  • The iPhone maker has listed Bing's poor search quality and inferior monetization capabilities as the main reasons it's maintaining the exclusive deal with Google.
  • Generative AI could reshape the search landscape, but the future is uncertain at best right now. 

It seems Apple has popped Microsoft's bubble and dwindled its hopes of Bing being its default search engine across its ecosystem over Google. According to StatCounter's latest report, Google dominates the search landscape with a whopping 91.04% while Bing only holds 3.86% of the market share.

Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google is a monopolist in the United States vs Google antitrust case, citing its massive scale, high capital costs, and more. Google has been wrapped up in an antitrust case for weeks. Perhaps the most interesting deduction from the case is that Apple and the average user share similar sentiments — Google is the preferred default search engine tool.

As you may know, Google pays Apple large sums of money to be the default search engine in Safari. Over the past few years, Google has been accused of breaking antitrust laws after allegedly paying approximately $15 billion to secure and assert its search engine dominance. In 2021, the company paid a jaw-dropping $26 billion to maintain its search engine as the default across Apple devices. 

Apple says there's no other meaningful alternative. According to Apple Senior VP of services Eddy Cue:

“I don’t believe there’s a price in the world that Microsoft could offer us. They offered to give us Bing for free. They could give us the whole company.”

Based on Apple's sentiments and decision to maintain Google Search as the only viable option, Judge Mehta says it indicates the “market reality is that Google is the only real choice as the default GSE [general search engine].” 

Why Apple will continue using Google as its default search engine in Safari over Bing

Bing search engine (Image credit: Future)

In case you missed it, Microsoft was on the brink of selling its Bing search engine to Apple in 2018. However, the plans fell through after it was spotted with critical search quality issues. Further building on this premise, Apple conducted a study in 2021 to determine the search quality between Google and Bing. 

The findings left Bing with the shorter end of the stick, deeming it inferior to Google Search. It's worth noting that Bing outperformed Google Search in the desktop user interface category, but Google made up for this shortcoming across the rest of the benchmarks. 

While appearing at Google's antitrust trial last year, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella indicated that Google doesn't play fair with Bing. Nadella claimed the exclusive deal between Google and Apple negatively impacted Bing's growth and reach. Interestingly, the CEO stated that Microsoft could pay up to $15 billion annually to attract a similar deal with Apple. He concluded by indicating it would be "a game-changing opportunity" for Microsoft.  

Microsoft proposed sharing 100% of its revenue from Bing with the iPhone maker to secure the deal, however, Apple raised concerns that it wouldn't be able to generate enough revenue because it was "horrible" at monetizing and advertising.

Aside from the recent challenges with its new flagship AI Overviews feature, Google generally spots a great reputation across the board (something Apple wants to maintain across its ecosystem). 

Apple's Senior VP of services indicated:

"It's a great product for our customers, and we wanted our customers to know that they're getting the Google search engine. It's a symbiotic relationship. Google is the best search engine."

Additionally, getting into a partnership with Microsoft and using Bing as the default search engine in Safari would force Apple to drop its current deal with Google. A move that would "jeopardize its revenue" as highlighted by Apple CEO Tim Cook.

 “AI may someday fundamentally alter search, but not anytime soon,” indicated Judge Amit Mehta. As you may know, Microsoft has been focused on integrating AI across its products and services, including Bing. 

The search engine surpassed over 140 million daily active users in April, with Microsoft attributing the increasing interest in the platform to the AI razzle-dazzle. It's possible that this could give Bing the upper hand over Google, helping it topple its dominance. 

🔥The hottest trending deals🔥

Kevin Okemwa
Contributor

Kevin Okemwa is a seasoned tech journalist based in Nairobi, Kenya with lots of experience covering the latest trends and developments in the industry at Windows Central. With a passion for innovation and a keen eye for detail, he has written for leading publications such as OnMSFT, MakeUseOf, and Windows Report, providing insightful analysis and breaking news on everything revolving around the Microsoft ecosystem. You'll also catch him occasionally contributing at iMore about Apple and AI. While AFK and not busy following the ever-emerging trends in tech, you can find him exploring the world or listening to music.

  • fjtorres5591
    At least not as long as they get 20Billion a year in kickbacks.

    Things will change as soon as the kickbacks go away.
    (In fact, they are no doubt cooking up an LLM search engine of their own for when Google's bounty goes away.)
    Reply
  • TheFerrango
    What do they mean "they offered Bing for free", shouldn't Microsoft be paying to get Bing set as the default?
    Reply
  • coffeecat
    TheFerrango said:
    What do they mean "they offered Bing for free", shouldn't Microsoft be paying to get Bing set as the default?
    What they meant is even if Microsoft give Bing, the actual product itself, the whole "company" for free. They won't want it. Because the revenue it generates is worse than the exclusive deal from Google, plus other reputational concerns.
    Reply
  • TheFerrango
    coffeecat said:
    What they meant is even if Microsoft give Bing, the actual product itself, the whole "company" for free. They won't want it. Because the revenue it generates is worse than the exclusive deal from Google, plus other reputational concerns.
    Ah, ok. Fair enough, thanks
    Reply
  • fjtorres5591
    coffeecat said:
    What they meant is even if Microsoft give Bing, the actual product itself, the whole "company" for free. They won't want it. Because the revenue it generates is worse than the exclusive deal from Google, plus other reputational concerns.
    Exactly.
    Bing "only" generates $8B a year net whereas google pays them $20-26B a year in kickbacks.
    Reply
  • ad47uk
    i don;lt use either directly, I use Duck Duck go on my phone, Mac and PC and Alexa i think use Bing, but I don't ask it stuff that often as it is not very good, I blame Bing.
    Reply
  • naddy69
    I swear I don't understand all the hoopla around searching. I have never used Google. I have been using Yahoo since before Google existed.

    I never have problems finding anything. The few times I have used Bing it worked just fine too. AltaVista worked fine years ago. DuckDuckGo works fine.

    If Google wants to pay boatloads of cash to Apple to make Google the default search engine, then that is fine. Both companies are happy.

    Besides, it's not like it's hard to change the default.

    And always remember this. U.S. anti-trust laws exist to protect consumers, not competitors. Bing and Yahoo can whine all they want about Google. It does not matter. Consumers are not being harmed by this deal, because most people want to use Google. Win-Win-Win.

    Giving consumers what they want is what business is all about. It's up to Bing/Yahoo/whoever to make their products more attractive if they want Apple to change their default.
    Reply
  • fjtorres5591
    naddy69 said:
    I swear I don't understand all the hoopla around searching. I have never used Google. I have been using Yahoo since before Google existed.

    I never have problems finding anything. The few times I have used Bing it worked just fine too. AltaVista worked fine years ago. DuckDuckGo works fine.

    If Google wants to pay boatloads of cash to Apple to make Google the default search engine, then that is fine. Both companies are happy.

    Besides, it's not like it's hard to change the default.

    And always remember this. U.S. anti-trust laws exist to protect consumers, not competitors. Bing and Yahoo can whine all they want about Google. It does not matter. Consumers are not being harmed by this deal, because most people want to use Google. Win-Win-Win.

    Giving consumers what they want is what business is all about. It's up to Bing/Yahoo/whoever to make their products more attractive if they want Apple to change their default.
    Depends on how you measure *customer* harm.
    And who the customer is. (Not you and not me.)
    Users are not the customer.

    Haven't you wondered why a business that generates a hundred billion-plus a year only has three measurable players and no specialty/focused services?

    Apple doesn't bother, Amazon tried and quit.
    No european engine has a measurable share.
    Businesses won't even try to get in if they don't see a path to profit.
    Users can't go to a service that doesn't exist. And without users, the search engines can't sell enough ads to survive.

    Individual users aren't the customers of Google search: companies buying online ads are their real customers and their choice is limited by google's monopoly. That is who is being hurt by Google's kickbacks. And who the judge is looking to protect.

    Remember that on the internet, if you're not paying you're not the customer but the product.

    *That* is why google pays to crowd out alternatives: to keep control of the user eyeballs they sell to the ad companies. And to make it even more questionable, google also controls the sale of online ads on the search page and their browser.

    It is the digital equivalent of the oil trusts of old.
    Reply