Hacker News Reader

Comment by simonh | Hacker News Reader

Google screws you over and you blame Apple. How does that work?

She explained that in these two lines:

> I write all of this because the prevailing theory in our industry is that this is Apple's way of fighting against right to repair.

> If only Apple authorized service providers are allowed to advertise on Google for repair-related keywords, Apple will have taken more teeth out of "right to repair."

Well, there is the important connection between how Apple was able to get Google to implement a ban on advertising. That was glossed over. I don't think it's impossible, but it's not such an easy leap as to not need any explanation.

That doesn't explain how it's Apple's fault. Google is unlikely to restrict advertising just because it's in Apple's interests.

If Google didn't have a reason to do so in its own self-interest, Apple would have to use a threat or a bribe to get Google to reduce its own advertising revenue in this way. The comment provides no evidence of that.

You trust google more than I do. I'm sure there was a tit for tat exchange or back room deal if it went down. It wouldn't be the first time for these companies.

I don't trust Google in the sense I think you're implying. I have no trouble believing Google would do something unethical that it believed it would profit from and get away with. That includes back room deals.

But the original comment didn't offer any evidence of one. I'd like to know if there is any beyond it being a plausible explanation.

Apple in the past has made back door deals to not hire the employees of other companies, I believe Google was one of them. Wouldn't surprise me if this was the case here.

To me it smacks of constructional reasoning, in the sense of fabricated a justification to support a pre-conceived narrative. As a prompt to investigation or a search for evidence, ok, fine, but on its own it’s just a conspiracy theory.

He explained that in these two lines:

(slight correction, it's "she explained")

It's a hypothesis. It's also Google's call, and Google is the one they're paying for ads.

It's really seems like a stretch without any evidence or more detailed reasoned argument. I mean, why would Google support Apple in doing this?

Apple and Amazon recently came to similar terms on search inside of Amazon- they cut out 3rd party non-Apple approved resellers from selling on their platform, so there is pretty direct precedent for Apple pushing for similar agreements:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/21/18624846/amazon-marketpla...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com