Opinion: Apple and Google Should Continue Working Together

Image via Complex Original

It's no secret that Apple and Google's once blossoming friendship is now on the rocks. It's been that way for a while. More specifically, it's been that way since Google announced it was going to release an operating system for smartphones that would not only compete with Apple's iPhone, but closely resemble it as well. Those who have read Steve Jobs's biography—or read the onslaught of media coverage around its release—learned how heated Jobs was with the Android OS. Google's former CEO, Eric Schmidt, stepped down from the Google board in 2009 due to the conflict of interests created by Google's newest ventures. Later, talks of the two companies parting ways began to bubble. Rumors sprang of Apple developing its own Maps app, negating the need for Google's offerings. When Apple released its iPhone 4S with the Siri personal assistant (in BETA) earlier this year, many opined that Apple plans to use the software to build its own search servie for iOS. Considering all that, it seems the two tech giants won't be chums for long. Here's why we think that will be a bad idea. 

Written by Rotimi Oyewole (@Rotechi)

If Siri really is "Beta" by Apple's standards, where exactly is this experiment going? 

A voice-enabled Apple TV is certainly one of many possibilities. But recently some have argued that Siri is Apple's foray into Google's turf: Search. In Steve Job's biography, the late CEO expresses unabashed resentment towards Android; Jobs regarded Google's competing mobile platform as a "stolen product." So is Siri a key piece of Apple's arsenal in the "thermonuclear war" against its opponent? Some writers have reasoned that Siri eliminates the need for search on the phone, which pretty much nixes the need for Google search on the iPhone. Apple's recent acquisitions also hint towards a home-brewed alternative to Google Maps, which has powered iOS's Maps app since the very first iPhone.  Even if Apple's ambition is to rid Google's presence from all of their products, the real question isn't whether they can do it, its whether they should.

Search isn't in Apple's DNA. Creating innovative software and hardware is.

 Siri works her magic by relaying any requests she can't address to the services Apple has partnered with (so far): Wolfram Alpha for math and fact related info, Wikipedia for encyclopedia related info and Yelp for location-based answers. For anything that these repositories can't cover, Siri prompts the user to search for the answer using Google or Bing. This all but confirms that Siri is useful for getting quick answers to your questions, but isn't quite a replacement for search. Voice search isn't particularly useful in crowded areas or environments where its inappropriate etiquette to hold a conversation with your phone. Beyond that, a real hurdle is convincing a culture so ingrained (and efficient) in using search boxes to change their ways and talk to a computer for answers. 

 Positioning Siri as a search engine just isn't sustainable. Android's voice technology is already pretty decent, and Google will undoubtedly catch up to Siri in interpreting natural voice. It makes more sense to expand on Siri's ability to do. Think verbs. Siri's ability to perform repetitive or involved tasks is more impressive than regurgitating facts from a limited number of partners, and much more likely to attract me to iOS; especially if Apple is touting Siri as a personal assistant. If I had a personal assistant I'd care more about their ability to handle my calls, emails, and calendar. Luckily, Apple's patents suggest that this is the path they will probably choose to follow. Apple is at its best when creating software that makes everyday tasks exponentially easier. Siri can be that tool.

Google is the best search engine.

Google knows search. For all intents and purposes, Google is the best search engine ever. While some (like the US Senate) point to the search behemoth's favorable market position as proof of its monopoly over search, the majority of loyal fans and power users will credit the quality of the search product as the reason they keep coming back. Users with Google accounts can receive more relevant results based on stored data like age, location, and previous search history.  Recent pushes with its fledgling social network Google+ aim to add a useful social element to search. Google has a massive user base and with their goals of creating synergy by integrating all their different products, we can expect Google search to keep getting better. More importantly, search engines intelligently democratize web results, Siri works with partners. While Wolfram-Alpha, Wikipedia, and Yelp are great reservoirs for certain types of information, search solely based on Apple's chosen partners isn't only limited, but is inimical to the way search should fundamentally work. 

Google has shelled out an undisclosed (but presumably very high) amount for the contract as the default search engine in iOS. Surprisingly, twice as many Google searches come from iPhones and iPads, despite Android having a larger share of the mobile market. Because so much of their mobile search traffic comes from iOS devices, Apple has leverage here. It should continue using it to drive up a bidding war between their two sworn enemies (Google and Microsoft) and let the real experts handle search. 

Stay focused on what matters. 

A complete divorce from Google would be rash, but when viewed on a case-by-case basis the results could be good business. The iOS Maps app, for example, isn't quite as good as Google Maps on Android devices, which has turn-by-turn directions and usually gets new features first. In this case, building a Maps app that competes with Google's on features while reflecting Apple's taste for simple, breathtaking design is in the best interest of its users and products. Getting rid of world's best search engine, doesn't have quite as clear benefits to a customer who depends on Google for search.

For a company so committed to excellence and detail, Apple shouldn't let its personal beef with Google get in the way of making sound business decisions. After all, Apple and Samsung are fighting over alleged patent infringements in courtrooms across the globe, but Apple still depends on Samsung to manufacture those A5 chips that power the iPhone. Why? Because the A-series of chips differentiate Apple from the rest of smartphone nation and deliver outstanding performance results. If Google helps bring the best possible web experience to its users, maybe Apple should make the same concession in the same spirit of striving for the best possible phone experience for their users.

Of course, Google is a web company with web products. Apple can always change the default search, map, and other apps in iOS. They could even yank Google's apps from the App Store if they really wanted to. But as long as the iPhone has Safari or any web browser, it's pretty much impossible to get rid of Google completely.