Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Google throws stones from its glass house, calls Siri 'competitive threat'

By | November 6, 2011, 11:34am PST

Summary: Amid calls that Google is “anti-competitive”, the search giant sees Siri as a “significant development” in mobile search. Could Siri spark the end for Google’s dominance?

Eric Schmidt, in another round with U.S. senators to face questions over Google’s alleged anti-competitiveness, says Google is threatened by Apple’s latest player in the search market: Siri.

“Apple has launched an entirely new approach to search technology with Siri, its voice-activated search and task-completion service built into the iPhone 4S”, Schmidt wrote in response to written questions posed by antitrust subcommittee lawmakers on Friday.

While other challenges faced by the company include Facebook’s integration of Bing as its default search option, and losing its real-time search of Twitter and other up-to-the-minute results, Siri appears to make Google worry the most.


(Source: CBS News)

Apple and Google, seemingly up until recently, were married in the technology world. Though signs of fraying of the carefully crafted relationship had appeared over the past year, it has since become clear that Apple was to ‘divorce’ itself from the search giant.

Though Apple has no primary stake in the search engine market, instead leveraging the capabilities of Google, as the iPhone’s primary search engine, and Microsoft’s Bing as another choice for consumers, Schmidt nevertheless sees the Cupertino-based technology giant as a threat to its global marketshare statistics.

Schmidt, who currently serves as Google’s executive chairman, insisted however that Google was “not dominant” in web search, as lawmakers contended.

The search giant currently holds 65.3 percent of the U.S. search engine marketshare according to comScore, as both U.S. and European antitrust authorities investigate the company.

Schmidt has two problems to contend with:

Firstly, he needs to convince primarily the U.S. authorities, rather than the European authority underdogs, that Google is not anti-competitive. If anything, to come across as ‘wounded’ and ‘the victim’ in all of this will score Schmidt bonus points. Secondly, and crucially, it needs to remain as the industry leader in search and mobile spaces; while appearing not to call Siri anti-competitive in itself, to push others into thinking it is.

It’s a difficult balance to strike. But amid Schmidt’s hedging answers, as part of his repeat Senate hearing, Apple may do more damage to Google than U.S. and European antitrust authorities.

Apple seems to have designed Siri in such a way that it only uses Google when it really has to; in a part to appear as truly ‘intelligent’, whilst also striking a blow to Google, by performing the bare minimum as part of their ongoing ‘divorce’ proceedings.

When asking Siri a question, it searches the web only as a last resort, bypassing Google as its default search engine, instead to claim the best answer it can from Wolfram Alpha, Yelp or other web services. Naturally, Google sees this as a threat.

Knowing full well that though Google has 44 percent of the mobile marketshare, with Google as the default search on its Android devices, and Apple only has 27 percent of the U.S. mobile slice, the numbers are beginning to collide. Google is quietly panicking.

But Schmidt is not alone in his Siri suspicions.

I, for one, could not for a moment be sarcastic, cruel or tormenting to Siri, unlike the millions of users worldwide that badger the assistant with inane, sexually-explicit questions — just by the off chance it is more intelligent than Apple lets on, and texts my entire phonebook contact list my deepest, darkest secrets as I sleep.

You never know.

Related:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Zack Whittaker, a criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, Canterbury, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

Disclosure

Zack Whittaker

I worked briefly with Microsoft UK in 2006 but no longer have any connection with the company. Regardless, I remain impartial and unbiased in my views.

I don't hold any stock or shares, investments or industrial secrets in any company, but have signed confidentiality agreements with a number of UK and U.S. organisations, whose names I am not at liberty to disclose.

I was involved with Kent Union, the University of Kent's student union, undertaking voluntary, non-salaried, elected positions between early 2009 and mid-2010.

No other company, body, government department, non-governmental organisation or third sector organisation employs me or pays me a salary in any capacity whatsoever.

As a freelance journalist, whenever expenses are given and taken by a company that is not CBS Interactive, these will be disclosed in each relevant post to ensure transparency.

I currently work with a UK law enforcement unit, but this is an entirely separate position which bears no connection to other work.

(Updated: 23rd October 2011)

Biography

Zack Whittaker

Zack Whittaker, criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, UK, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

After studying criminology at university, though still in his early-20's, he has already had a series unconventional work and voluntary positions. He has worked with researchers studying neurological illnesses like Tourette's syndrome (which he suffers from), has given lectures on the nature of disabilities in the public community, and occasionally ends up speaking on television and radio discussing the events of the day.

He first had academic work published at the age of 22, then still an undergraduate, and has been cited by a wide range of publications: from CNN, the Huffington Post, AllThingsDigital, The Atlantic Wire and CBS News.

40
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Google throws stones from its glass house, calls Siri 'competitive threat'
NoThomas 8th Nov
@belli_bettens

sure I do, which one though? if you are talking about google check this one by the NY times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/technology/companies/25google.html "The case, initiated by the E.U. in January, accused Microsoft of illegally tying Internet Explorer to Windows to stifle competition in the browser market," so tell me can I install firefox and only use firefox on ChromeOS? This is Feb 25, 2009

July 7th, 2009 Google announces ChromeOS: http://www.pcworld.com/article/168028/google_announces_chrome_os.html
5 months after Google "accused Microsoft of illegally tying Internet Explorer to Windows to stifle competition in the browser market," Google realeases a OS tied to a web browser.

If you are talking about Intel: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/antitrust-charges-filed-against-intel/6071?tag=search-results-rivers;item13
This is an attempt to show that Google is not a monopoly and that it is not a threat to the web, that's all.
Saying the Siri, a voice activated search engine on the iphone is a threat to the existence of google is silly
0 Votes
+ -
Actually, it is
rhonin Updated - 6th Nov
@rgor@...
The general public may not realize that the SIRI responses are not "google" and are filtered, heavily filtered for some questions.
Thinking they are getting "Google" level results I can see the potential shift as Apple extends SIRI to future models and possibly the iPad2 / iPhone4.

Unfortunately intriguing......
@rhonin
Actually rgor@ is right Schmidt contiunes to deny that Google has a monopoly in search(It holds 90%+ marketshare worldwide) which is kinda silly
There is nothing wrong with beign a monopoly as long as it's fair.
@g@.....
Check again.
Google owns just under a 66% market share - not the 90 you espouse...

Now tell me how many folks you know think Google and SIRI have the same data sources or quality of data...
@rhonin I agree to some extent but the context of his statement needs to be taken into account. He is talking to a legal body and trying to defend his company from an accusation.
Think of iphone usage. What percentage of people "talk" to their phones with confidence? What percent of those are iphone users and what percent of that percent are siri users who do rely on google for search?
Saying that a voice assisted search feature on the iphone 4s that still uses Google (albeit to a smaller degree) is a threat to Google's monopoly is silly.
If he wanted to prove a point, he could argue that facebook or twitter could be threats or that Microsoft's OS dominance prevents google from being an abusive monopoly, but he didn't which is odd.
@g@...

Where do you get that number? The numbers the committee had put Google at 90% ONLY for mobile. The committee completely ignored the existence of facebook or social media. Even then, they could only pump Google to the 65% mark on the desktop(and laptop).
@rhonin

I've read it holds 95%+ market share in EU...

G might be a monopoly there, I guess.
0 Votes
+ -
Google is not a monopoly
otaddy 7th Nov
@rgor@... 90% market share doesnt make it so. Unfortunately, to the US govt, any market share greater than your competitor's is considered a monopoly.
0 Votes
+ -
Unless You Own Your Own Congressmen
crazydanr@... Updated - 7th Nov
@otaddy
*cough* telecom *cough* cable companies *cough*
@otaddy

90% WOULD make it a monopoly. Not ALL monopolies are illegal, which is why it's not called anti-monopoly law. That said, the 90% number is bogus, and THAT is why Google is not a monopoly at all.
@crazydanr
You can be sure that Google also has its men inside. You should check Schmidts' history, very enlightening.
Good point though happy
I look forward to the day Apple severs all ties with Google and Google technology... Google has become a search monster, tracking every detail it possibly can about users, using both legal and illegal means.

The entire idea of a mobile OS (Android) was stolen by Eric Schmidt when he sat on Apples Board. He was smart enough to see the writing on the wall, mobile smartphones were the future. So he took what he knew Apple was doing back to Google and a few months later Android appears.

Google has repeatedly been busted violating consumer privacy laws and has become an arrogant and evil organization despite item 6 of their policy "You can make money without doing evil", which is utter BS.
"Saying that a voice assisted search feature on the iphone 4s that still uses Google (albeit to a smaller degree) is a threat to Google's monopoly is silly."

Well, wait till Siri grows up; she's only 1 month old.
@pk de cville
And you now what they do,they speak and fill there nappies with a lot of s__t.
No doubt being given a lot pur??ed Apple and juice,to grow up be a big .......
I don't understand the significance of the title. The phrase would seem to come from the saying "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones", which as I understand it is a warning against hypocrisy. So where is the hypocrisy here, exactly? Is Google doing something it doesn't want others to do?

Please explain.
@ldo17 Yeah, it unfortunate that ZdNet is getting on this behavior of creating Overhyped story titles to get web hits.
@mktpostal@...

Agreed. This isn't the first time a story title on a ZDNet was just click bait X(.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes
Cylon Centurion 6th Nov
@ldo17

It doesn't want anyone else to steal their shine. Google feels very threatened by Bing, Wolfram, etc.
@Cylon Centurion
Not a threat from Wolfram - If you read the fine print, answers from Wolfram belong to Wolfram - and if you use those answers in anything else, you owe them money.

Thread by Bing? not really. Bing still has to fill out their database faster than Google. And that isn't happening yet. Someday maybe.
@ldo17
Its not unprecendented for google. Case in point, Google joined with other companies in the EU antitrust cast against MS saying it was wrong of MS for including a web browser in its OS, while at the same time annoucing and releasing ChromeOS. Which is of course an OS that includes a web browser.

I think what Zack is saying is Google has s lions share of the search market and even bigger in ads and when a competitor comes along they are calling them anti-competitive.

Really its not even google i am concerned about. Its Intel, they should be investigated to determine if they are using their monopoly unfairly. I read a story about them and if 1/2 of what was said was true then they are worse then MS was in their darkest days.
@NoThomas Spot on. You get 10 points.
@NoThomas Sounds intriguing, you have the link to that story by chance?
@belli_bettens

sure I do, which one though? if you are talking about google check this one by the NY times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/technology/companies/25google.html "The case, initiated by the E.U. in January, accused Microsoft of illegally tying Internet Explorer to Windows to stifle competition in the browser market," so tell me can I install firefox and only use firefox on ChromeOS? This is Feb 25, 2009

July 7th, 2009 Google announces ChromeOS: http://www.pcworld.com/article/168028/google_announces_chrome_os.html
5 months after Google "accused Microsoft of illegally tying Internet Explorer to Windows to stifle competition in the browser market," Google realeases a OS tied to a web browser.

If you are talking about Intel: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/antitrust-charges-filed-against-intel/6071?tag=search-results-rivers;item13
@ldo17 'Throw scones from its bakery' just didn't have the same eye-grab potential....
I tell you what is really anti-competitive behavior. It is anti-competitive when Facebook and Microsoft collude with each to make Bing the default search engine in Facebook while locking all other search engines out.
0 Votes
+ -
@mktpostal@...
Is it any different then Google incorporating their search into products like Google apps, ect?

If Facebook makes a business deal that uses Bing as it's search provider, how is that different then any other company that makes exclusive deals on particular products?

If a home improvement company signs a deal to be the exclusive seller of a particular building product, and it is exceptable, then how is a web based company ant different?

Why should companies like Facebook should be forced to operate differently?

plain
0 Votes
+ -
@Mister Spock If they were using something else, it's doubtful he would have complained.
0 Votes
+ -
Exactly
William Farrell 7th Nov
@Mister Spock
It's only anti-competitive when MS does it.

But if Firefox gets an exclusive deal where Google is teh default search engine, then that's fine.

And the fact that you can't change it to another search provider is irrelevant - nothing says that they have to let you, anymore then Sears has to let you buy Kenmore appliences through Home Depot.
@Mister Spock

not facebook - MS.

Exclusive deals are anti-competitive due to MS being convicted of anti-trust violations. It comes with the territory of being a monopoly.
@Mister Spock

Uh, you seem to miss the very very important difference between "exlusive" and "default". It's you three who are the hypocrites here. If Microsoft and Facebook can make exclusives deals on one of the SINGLE LARGEST VOLUME online search engines, then how can Google be "uncompetitive" when at it does win a public bid for "default" status on the iPhone?
0 Votes
+ -
I would have thought...
wright_is 6th Nov
that they would be more worried about the European Commission than the US Commission, seeing as they have a much larger market share here (Germany was around 98% Google, when I last looked).

Also, it was the Europeans which actually took on Microsoft, after the US had kowtowed to them and gave them a free pass, only re-opening the investigation, once the EU had slapped a heavy fine on MS.
Siri is just copying one of the features of Kinect, as launched back in 2010. It's a shame there were no articles like this ag the time, when it truly was new and innovative, but Apple-obsessed bloggers are less eager to report on Microsoft technology.
Siri is only fast because it is server farmed in Cupertino to optimize response time. Apple copied the same web page optimizations that Opera has done for years except in their case for searches. This is why Siri has been DOA for several days. Apple did not properly alot for the huge volume of traffic it would generate which in it's most basic form caused it's own fan-base to DOS them. Hilarious! Now if people realized that they weren'y getting a clean search and instead only results deemed by Apple to be sufficient, they might not trust the service quite as much.
0 Votes
+ -
Awful article
kaon1 7th Nov
How is Google calling Siri a competitive threat equivalent to throwing stones in glass houses? Are you brain-dead? Competitive threats appears all the time in business, usually from the 'competition'. You state that Schmidt is implying that Siri is anti-competitive. No he's not - he's making a case that Google faces robust competition. Get a clue, or a new job!
I only use Google as my search engine and am very pleased with doing so. So if the general public prefers to use a certain service or support a certain company that becomes a monopoly and thus is anti-competitive? And how does a gimmick like Siri become a threat? It's not like the computers in Star Trek, et.al., so ?
@Romas27

It's not like the computers in Star Trek..........yet. In its infancy, Siri may appear to be a gimmick or fad, but mark my words; this technology will be the norm and will dominate in the VERY near future. Don't believe me? Stick around. If any of you invest, I would get in the game NOW!
0 Votes
+ -
When competition is tough
NoAxToGrind 7th Nov
Hire more lawyers...
Hey, Zach, try actually watching the committee hearing. It's both boring and infuriating, but the committee DEFINITELY has their enormous heads up their asses. The 90% on mobile number was further from 2009, only included the US, and was based upon the fact that Google won the public bid placed by APPLE for the default search engine for the iPhone. Furthermore, besides marketshare and the committee's inability to even figure out what the market is, they clearly had no idea what the other criteria were for defining an illegal monopoly.
0 Votes
+ -
All of this is nice, it gives the Google-bashers a place to vent their spleen. Google is actually very right on point. I'm seriously disappointed with the IT industry as a whole when they didn't adopt voice at the main command & control language for mobile devices. It's a no-brainer. The technology is finally there and it's not like the software is new. It's from Nuance as in 'Dragon Naturally Speaking' and the particular chip/memory/storage mix is about the same as I use here. Enabling voice is only one part of the future device technology interfaces, but a very necessary step. Nice to see Google recognizes this fact. Sad to see others don't. As for voice driven search, well anyone can do it. Guess only Apple is willing to take a chance.

So, coming to an Android and Windows phone near you....
0 Votes
+ -
Siri and its impact
samzbest@... 8th Nov
Siri is more useful than androids take command only voice software. it bring interactiveness and human touch to AI agents
such as funny jokes it tells to owners
http://thetechnologycafe.com/siri-and-its-jokesmore-****-and-funny-stuff-siri-says/

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix