Search results for: “google pay”

  • Apple to update Home app and expand Apple Pay in UAE and Qatar

    Apple to update Home app and expand Apple Pay in UAE and Qatar

    Apple is making some big changes soon. They’re updating the Home app for HomeKit devices and bringing Apple Pay to more banks in the UAE and Qatar. Here’s what’s happening in simple terms.

    Home App Gets a Must-Do Upgrade

    Back when iOS 16 came out, Apple rolled out a new setup for the Home app to make smart home devices work better. Until now, switching to this new setup was up to users, but that’s about to change. Apple will soon make everyone upgrade to the new HomeKit system.

    Hints found in the iOS 18.4 beta 3 update, shared with developers recently, show that the old HomeKit setup won’t work anymore. A message in the app says the old version will stop soon, urging users to update to keep their smart devices running smoothly. Apple says this new setup is faster and more dependable. It first showed up in iOS 16.2 beta but had issues, so Apple paused it. They brought it back with iOS 16.4 in February 2023.

    The catch? If you upgrade, older iOS or macOS devices can’t use the Home app anymore. Some people avoided updating for this reason, but soon, everyone will need to switch to keep using their HomeKit gadgets. No exact date is set, but it might tie into iOS 19. The iOS 18.4 update, expected in early April, will also add more languages to Apple Intelligence.

    Apple Pay Grows in UAE and Qatar

    Apple Pay is already in the UAE and Qatar, but more people will soon get to use it. Apple is teaming up with local card networks—Jaywan in the UAE and Himyan in Qatar—to let their customers pay with iPhone or Apple Watch.

    Code in iOS 18.4 beta 3 shows this is in the works. Jaywan has shared plans to boost digital payments in the UAE, including support for Apple Pay and Google Pay. They’ve also partnered with big names like Visa and Mastercard and even Samsung for its wallet app. Himyan’s been quiet, but support seems likely. With Apple Pay, users can add cards to the Wallet app for easy, contactless payments in stores or online. This should roll out around April when iOS 18.4 goes live. These updates mean better control of your smart home and easier payments in more places!

  • Apple seeks to protect its big money deal with Google

    Apple seeks to protect its big money deal with Google

    Apple is fighting to save its huge money-making deal with Google, which is under threat because Google was found to break competition laws. Apple has asked the court dealing with Google’s legal battle with the U.S. government for some extra time, so they can argue their case before any final decisions are made.

    The U.S. Department of Justice took Google to court over unfair competition in the search market back in 2020. After a long fight, the DOJ won. A big part of this lawsuit was Google’s agreement with Apple, where Google pays billions each year to be the first choice search engine on Apple’s Safari browser. The judge ruled that this deal was against competition laws and helped Google keep its top spot in the search engine world.

    The U.S. government wants to stop Google from making such deals with Apple and other companies, which would hit Apple’s earnings hard. For instance, in 2022, Google paid Apple around $20 billion. Apple already tried to get more involved in the case as the solutions were being discussed, but the court said no because of timing issues. Apple is now appealing that decision and wants a pause while the appeal is considered.

    Apple argues that since its deal with Google is on the line, it should have the right to join the discussion, warning that without this pause, they could be seriously harmed.

    If Apple can’t join in the legal proceedings, they won’t be able to present their own evidence or arguments. If the appeal drags on until or after the trial for solutions starts, Apple might just have to watch, unable to speak or defend itself, while the government pushes for changes that directly affect Apple, like banning any business deals with Google for ten years.

    Besides stopping deals like this one, the U.S. Department of Justice also wants to go further, suggesting Google should sell its Chrome browser and separate Android from services like Google Search and the Google Play Store. Google has a lot to lose and might focus more on saving Chrome than its deal with Apple.

    When Apple first wanted a bigger say in the case, they argued that Google can’t properly look after Apple’s interests anymore because the case covers so much ground. The DOJ, predictably, doesn’t want Apple in the part of the trial where solutions are decided, which is due to start in April.

    If the court rules against Google paying Apple to be the default search on Safari, Apple would still have to offer Google Search as an option, but they wouldn’t get paid for it anymore.

    Source

  • Why Apple prefers Google Search (and Why Regulators Might Not)

    Why Apple prefers Google Search (and Why Regulators Might Not)

    The internet landscape is dominated by a few key players, and the relationship between Apple and Google is a fascinating one. Recently, Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of services, made headlines by declaring the company’s continued commitment to Google as the default search engine on its devices. This decision, fueled by a multi-billion dollar deal between the two giants, raises questions about competition, user privacy, and the future of search itself.

    A Symbiotic Partnership: Billions and Brand Loyalty

    The financial incentive for Apple’s stance is undeniable. Google reportedly pays a staggering $20 billion annually to maintain its position as the default search engine on iPhones, iPads, and Macs. This hefty sum translates to a significant revenue stream for Apple, with an additional 36% of ad revenue generated from Safari searches finding its way back to Cupertino. The partnership also fosters brand loyalty for both companies. Google benefits from the massive user base of Apple devices, while Apple leverages Google’s established search technology, ensuring a seamless user experience.

    Beyond the Money: Resources and Innovation

    However, Eddy Cue’s statement goes beyond just financial gain. He argues that developing a new search engine from scratch would be a resource-intensive endeavor, demanding “billions of dollars and many years.” This investment would divert focus away from other areas of Apple’s innovation pipeline, potentially hindering the development of groundbreaking new products and services.

    Furthermore, Cue emphasizes the dynamic nature of search technology. Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the way searches are conducted and interpreted. Building a competitive search engine would require constant investment in AI research and development, a gamble with an uncertain payoff.

    The Privacy Conundrum: Targeted Ads vs. User Choice

    A key sticking point in the debate concerns user privacy. Apple prides itself on its commitment to data protection. Building a successful search engine often relies on targeted advertising, a practice that raises privacy concerns. Cue acknowledges this, highlighting that Apple currently lacks the infrastructure and expertise necessary to navigate the world of targeted advertising at scale.

    Interestingly, despite Google being the default option, users retain the ability to choose alternative search engines like Yahoo!, Bing, DuckDuckGo, or Ecosia. This element of user control adds another layer to the conversation.

    Regulators Step In: Balancing Competition and Revenue

    The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) intervention in 2023 throws a wrench into the well-oiled machine of the Apple-Google partnership. The DOJ accuses Google of anti-competitive practices, with the search engine deal used as evidence. Regulators have proposed two remedies:

    1. Maintaining Google as the default search engine but stripping Apple of ad revenue: This approach aims to foster competition by creating a disincentive for Apple to favor Google.
    2. Preventing future deals between Apple and Google altogether: This more drastic measure seeks to dismantle the existing partnership and force both companies to compete on a level playing field.

    Cue vehemently disagrees with both options. He argues that Apple should retain the right to choose partnerships that best serve its users. He believes that the DOJ’s remedies would ultimately “hamstring Apple’s ability to continue delivering products that best serve its users’ needs.”

    The Future of Search: A Collaborative Landscape?

    As the battle between regulators and tech giants continues, the future of search takes center stage. Will the partnership between Apple and Google endure, or will a more fragmented landscape emerge? Perhaps the answer lies in fostering collaboration between tech companies and regulators, creating a framework that promotes innovation, user privacy, and healthy competition within the search ecosystem.

    One thing is certain: the current landscape is far from static. The next generation of search experiences may be powered by AI, prioritize privacy, and cater to user needs in ways we can only begin to imagine. As companies like Apple and Google continue to navigate this ever-evolving landscape, the fight for search supremacy promises to be a fascinating one to watch.

  • UK watchdog points finger at Apple for limiting browser choices

    UK watchdog points finger at Apple for limiting browser choices

    The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) shared its final thoughts on Wednesday about the mobile browser market in the country. The group says Apple’s rules are the main reason why competition and new ideas are being held back.

    The CMA’s team found that Apple forces all browsers on iPhones and iPads to use its WebKit engine. This stops other browsers from adding special features or running better, even if they work well on other systems. It’s a big roadblock for companies trying to stand out.

    The report also highlights other Apple habits that cause trouble. For example, Safari gets special perks on iOS that other browsers don’t. Apple also limits how browsing works inside apps and makes Safari the go-to browser pre-installed on every iPhone.

    Google got some attention, too, for putting Chrome on Android phones from the start. But the CMA said Apple’s limits hurt competition more. They also pointed out a big money deal where Google pays Apple billions each year to stay the default search engine on iPhones. This setup makes it less likely for them to compete.

    Since the CMA’s early report last November, both companies have made some changes. Apple’s December update, for instance, made it a bit easier for users to pick a different browser. The CMA says these steps help a little but don’t fix everything.

    To solve the bigger problems, the CMA suggests ideas like letting other browser engines work on iOS, adding a screen during setup to pick a browser (like in the EU), and putting limits on the Google-Apple search deal. These aren’t rules yet—the CMA is still checking if Apple and Google should get a “strategic market status” label under a new UK law. That decision, due later this year, could let the CMA set tougher rules and fines up to 10% of the companies’ yearly earnings.

    The report also wrapped up a look at cloud gaming. After Apple tweaked its App Store rules, the CMA decided no more action was needed there. This comes as regulators in places like the European Union and the United States also dig into mobile browser fairness.

  • The Search for a Search Engine: Why Apple isn’t entering the fray

    The Search for a Search Engine: Why Apple isn’t entering the fray

    The digital landscape is dominated by a few key players, and the search engine arena is no exception. Google has reigned supreme for years, leaving many to wonder why other tech giants haven’t made a serious push to compete. One such giant is Apple, a company known for its innovation and user-centric approach. Recently, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Services, Eddy Cue, shed light on why the company has no plans to develop its own search engine, offering a candid look at the challenges and considerations involved.

    Cue’s insights emerged within the context of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) antitrust case against Google. Apple filed a motion to intervene, seeking to participate in the penalty phase, which could have significant financial implications for the company due to its lucrative default search engine deal with Google. This deal, which has been the subject of scrutiny, sees Google paying Apple a substantial sum to be the default search engine on Safari.

    The DOJ and Google have been at odds over how to address Google’s dominance in the search market. One proposed solution involves altering or terminating the Google-Apple partnership. Google even suggested a three-year ban on long-term exclusivity deals involving any “proprietary Apple feature or functionality.” However, Cue argues that dismantling the current arrangement could have unintended consequences, ultimately benefiting Google while harming Apple and its users.

    Cue painted a stark picture of the options Apple would face if the current deal were dissolved. He explained that Apple would essentially be left with two undesirable choices. First, it could continue to offer Google as a search option in Safari, but without receiving any revenue share.

    This scenario would grant Google free access to Apple’s vast user base, a significant advantage for the search giant. Alternatively, Apple could remove Google Search as a choice altogether. However, given Google’s popularity among users, this move would likely be detrimental to both Apple and its customers, who have come to rely on Google’s search capabilities.

    The prospect of Apple developing its own search engine has been a recurring topic of speculation. Cue addressed this directly, stating that creating a viable competitor to Google would be an incredibly expensive and time-consuming undertaking. He estimated that such an endeavor would cost billions of dollars and take many years to come to fruition. This economic reality makes entering the search engine market a significant risk for Apple.

    Furthermore, Cue highlighted the inherent challenges in building a successful search engine. He pointed out that to make such a venture economically viable, Apple would likely have to adopt targeted advertising as a core component. This approach clashes with Apple’s strong emphasis on user privacy, a cornerstone of its brand identity and a key differentiator in the market. Integrating targeted advertising into a search engine would require a significant shift in Apple’s business model and could potentially alienate its privacy-conscious customer base.

    Cue also touched upon the evolving nature of search itself. He suggested that AI-powered chatbots represent the next major evolution in information retrieval, hinting that Apple may be focusing its efforts on developing innovative AI-driven solutions rather than attempting to replicate the traditional search engine model. This perspective aligns with the growing trend of integrating AI into various aspects of technology, offering a more conversational and personalized approach to accessing information.

    In the filing, Apple emphasized its right to determine the best way to serve its users. Cue asserted that “only Apple can speak to what kinds of future collaborations can best serve its users,” expressing concern that the DOJ’s proposed remedies could “hamstring” Apple’s ability to meet its customers’ needs. This statement underscores Apple’s desire to maintain control over its ecosystem and strategic partnerships.

    In conclusion, Eddy Cue’s insights provide a compelling explanation for Apple’s decision to stay out of the search engine race. The immense financial investment, the long development timeline, the potential conflict with its privacy principles, and the emergence of AI-driven alternatives all contribute to this strategic choice.

    Rather than attempting to compete directly with Google in the traditional search arena, Apple appears to be focusing on innovation in other areas, potentially exploring new ways for users to access and interact with information. The ongoing antitrust case and its potential ramifications will continue to shape the dynamics of the search market and Apple’s role within it.

    Source

  • Why Siri’s big upgrade needs to be amazing by 2027

    Why Siri’s big upgrade needs to be amazing by 2027

    Apple used to be a top player in smart assistants, but in just 14 years, it’s fallen behind. Back in 2011, Siri felt like the future. Now, in 2025, Apple Intelligence feels weak compared to what’s out there.

    Siri’s 14-Year Journey

    I still remember the iPhone 4S launch when Siri stole the show. It wasn’t even Apple’s idea at first—it started as an app someone else made. Steve Jobs saw its potential, bought it, and put it into the iPhone. That move made smart assistants a must-have for phones. But after 14 years, Siri should be incredible by now.

    It’s not. In 2015, I wished Siri could work with my apps. It’s only starting to do that now, a whole decade later! Worse, in 2018, I listed simple things Siri couldn’t handle—and it still can’t do some of them. Today, Siri feels basic while tools like ChatGPT shine.

    Why Apple’s Behind

    Apple has reasons for lagging. One is reliability. Other companies like OpenAI raced ahead, even if their AI sometimes messed up big time—like ChatGPT inventing fake facts or Google’s Bard flopping in a demo. Siri’s spoken answers can’t afford those mistakes—it’d be risky to hear wrong info without a warning.

    Another reason is privacy. Siri sticks to two rules: process stuff on your phone when it can, and keep your identity hidden when it uses Apple’s servers. That’s safer but less powerful than rivals who use big data centers and know tons about you.

    The Privacy Win

    Last year, I said waiting for a smarter Siri would pay off because of privacy. Our phones hold so much—calendar, messages, health info—and soon, Siri can tap into apps we pick, all without leaving our device. That could make Siri as good as the competition, but safer. I want an assistant who knows me well but stays private. That’s what Apple’s aiming for.

    A Longer Wait

    We thought this new Siri would hit in 2026. Now, the word is it’s delayed to 2027—or later. That’s tough, but if it’s great, we’ll forget the wait. Still, by 2027, other AI like ChatGPT or Amazon’s Alexa will be miles ahead. Siri has to be spectacular to catch up. Apple’s got a big challenge, but I’m hopeful it’ll be worth it.

  • Do app privacy tags affect your download choices?

    Do app privacy tags affect your download choices?

    In 2020, Apple rolled out privacy tags to show users what info an app might grab—like stuff tied to you or used to follow you around online. These tags were a game-changer, shining a light on apps that scoop up too much personal data. For example, you could see Signal barely touches your info, while Facebook Messenger slurps up everything it can for ads or upgrades. The goal? Help people pick apps wisely.

    Lately, though, I’ve noticed folks wondering if these self-reported tags—tucked way down on an app’s App Store page—still sway anyone before they tap “Get.” Apple splits these “privacy nutrition tags” into three types:

    • Data Tied to You: This is stuff like your name, address, email, exact location, or shopping history that’s linked to you, often for ads or tailoring the app. Developers have to spill it if it points back to you.
    • Data Not Tied to You: Info collected but kept nameless, usually to tweak the app. Apple makes sure it can’t be traced back to you.
    • Data That Tracks You: This follows you across apps and sites—like Google or Meta using your device ID for custom ads or selling it to data collectors.

    People get loud about privacy when a hot new app, like Threads, sparks worry. Back then, users scratched their heads over why it listed “Health and Fitness” data with no clear reason. Yet Threads still shot to the top of social media downloads. So, do these tags really matter?

    Here’s the catch: developers report this stuff themselves. Apple trusts them to be honest, which speeds up approvals but can blur the truth. For users, the tags are handy—if you dig for them and know what they mean. But just because they’re listed doesn’t guarantee they’re accurate. As Apple pushes privacy hard, the real challenge is teaming up with developers to make things clearer, explain data use better, and keep overstating in check. So, do privacy tags sway your downloads? Maybe—if you’re paying attention.

  • Apple’s App Store faces public hearing in Brazil over competition rules

    Apple’s App Store faces public hearing in Brazil over competition rules

    Next week, Apple will have to explain its App Store practices in Brazil due to an ongoing antitrust investigation. The Brazilian competition authority, known as Cade, has been looking into whether Apple’s rules for the App Store are fair to other companies.

    Antitrust Scrutiny in Brazil

    Cade is holding a public hearing to talk about competition issues in the world of mobile apps, especially on iOS devices. Google will also be there since it’s under similar scrutiny for its Android platform.

    According to local news sources, the hearing is meant to address the increasing complaints about unfair business practices in digital markets, focusing on how mobile devices and their operating systems operate.

    Complaints and Investigations

    Companies like Match, which runs Tinder, and Epic Games, famous for their battle with Apple over Fortnite, have made complaints to Cade about both Apple and Google. These firms argue that Apple and Google have rules that hurt competition. Representatives from these companies are expected at the hearing.

    Cade’s investigation into Apple started when Mercado Libre, a big e-commerce player in Latin America, claimed that Apple forces developers to use its payment system for digital goods, which could stifle competition. There’s also a concern about “tying,” where Apple links the use of one product to another, potentially anti-competitive practice.

    Previous Rulings and Appeals

    Last year, Cade decided that Apple couldn’t stop developers from selling apps outside the App Store in Brazil. Apple was supposed to follow this rule within 20 days or face daily fines of over $40,000. However, after Apple appealed, a judge decided they didn’t need to change right away, giving them more time to argue their case.

    The outcome of this case could mean big changes for how Apple’s App Store operates in Brazil if Apple doesn’t win the appeal.

    Looking Ahead

    The Brazilian government is also planning to look into how other big tech firms like Meta and Amazon do business, showing that this hearing might just be the start of broader regulatory actions. All this comes at a time when international trade tensions, like those hinted at by former US President Trump’s tariff threats, could influence tech policy globally.

    Source

  • Apple might add ads to its Maps app

    Apple might add ads to its Maps app

    Apple is thinking about adding advertisements to its Maps application, according to Mark Gurman in his newsletter, Power On. This move would be similar to what they’ve already done with their News and Stocks apps, aiming to grow their own advertising business.

    This isn’t a new idea for Apple. A few years back, Apple’s team looked into putting ads into Maps. The plan was that businesses could pay to have their places, like restaurants or shops, show up higher when someone searches for something in the app, much like how Google Maps works.

    Recently, in a meeting, this idea of making money from Maps through ads came up again. Gurman suggests that some places might even appear more noticeable on the map if they pay for it.

    There’s no set date for when we might see these ads in Apple Maps. They haven’t even started working on the tech for it yet. But, Apple is thinking about how they could do this in the future.

    Source

  • Trump’s tariffs might make Apple products costlier in the US

    Trump’s tariffs might make Apple products costlier in the US

    Apple products in the United States might soon cost more because President Trump has put a 10% tax on imports from China. Even though Apple has been trying to spread out where it gets its parts, most of its gadgets are still made in China.

    Back when Trump was president before, he also put taxes on many things coming from China. Apple managed to get some exemptions, but this new rule seems to apply to everything from China.

    The Chip Tariff That Never Happened

    Trump once talked about putting a huge tax on Chinese-made computer chips, but that didn’t happen. This was good news for Apple since their products use these chips but aren’t chips themselves. People pointed out this would hurt American companies making electronics in the US with parts from China, so the plan was dropped.

    New Tariffs on Everything

    Later, Trump threatened to tax all products from Canada, Mexico, and China. He wanted a 25% tax on items from Canada and Mexico and 10% on Chinese goods. Canada and Mexico promised to tighten border security and fight drug trafficking to avoid these taxes, while also warning they might tax US goods in return.

    Trump decided to wait 30 days before starting the tax on Canada and Mexico, but the Chinese tax began right away. China responded by taxing American products and looking into possible antitrust issues with companies like Apple and Google.

    Impact on Apple

    Now, Apple has to pay an extra 10% on everything it brings in from China. This could mean higher prices for consumers or lower profits for Apple if they decide to cover the cost themselves.

    What Apple Might Do

    While some companies might increase prices, it’s unclear what Apple will do. They’ve done both in the past – raised prices and cut profits. With Trump’s decisions changing often, Apple might wait to see if these tariffs stick around before deciding.

    In summary, Trump’s tariff policies could lead to pricier Apple products. How Apple responds will depend on how long these taxes last and how they affect the market.

    Source