Well, consider that if Apple were an open platform, this default would be set by most "for free".
"Forced" here doesn't mean coerced, more in the sense of "forced error"; ie., as a move within a game than an opponent forces you to make.
"Forced" here doesn't mean coerced, more in the sense of "forced error"; ie., as a move within a game than an opponent forces you to make.
[0]https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/15/21370020/mozilla-google-f...
The "issue" is that they are charging for something the users would set themselves, and otherwise, already want.
Google is being "forced" into paying for this only because apple is willing to act against its users preferences, and eg., set a Bing default.
> If the platform invited the user to set a default, or was "biased towards their user's preferences", as most would select google, google would be the "natural default".
You almost make it sound like defaulting to Google without making people aware of the alternatives is “open” and unbiased.”
I get that iOS is closed down, but I'm a bit confused how being "open" would resolve the fact that a default search engine for Safari is set? You can still change your search engine on iOS (to one of few the browser ships with, Google, Yahoo, Bing and Duck Duck Go in UK)
Firefox is completely open/open source (isnt it?), yet Google pays Firefox for being the default search engine.
Open vs Closed has nothing to do with this. Google wants to be the default in browsers, and it choses to pay for the luxury.
If the platform invited the user to set a default, or was "biased towards their user's preferences", as most would select google, google would be the "natural default".
There is a sort of mild rent-seeking / racketeering in asking google to pay to configure a service Apple provides, to a default Apple's users would chose for themselves.