Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

Apple almost rejected Google for this key Safari feature

Add as a preferred source on Google

As part of an ongoing antitrust trial against Google, Apple has been defending its decision to make Google the default search engine in its Safari web browser. Now, a fascinating tidbit has just emerged: Safari could have been way better at protecting your privacy than it actually is.

In transcripts from the court hearing, it has been revealed that Apple considered making DuckDuckGo the default search engine in Safari’s private browsing mode while keeping Google as the mainstay everywhere else. Despite holding 20 meetings with DuckDuckGo’s executives between 2018 and 2019, Apple ultimately decided against the move.

A MacBook with Google Chrome loaded.
Firmbee / Unsplash

It’s an interesting revelation because DuckDuckGo is a privacy-focused search engine whose entire raison d’être is essentially to be the opposite of Google. DuckDuckGo makes a point of automatically blocking things like trackers and user fingerprinting, making for a much more private experience than you get with Google, Bing, and other mainstream engines.

Recommended Videos

That seems like it would be a great fit for Apple, a company whose unofficial slogan seems to be “privacy is a human right.” Yet in the end, Apple decided to stick with Google.

Privacy concerns

DuckDuckGo
DuckDuckGo

According to the court testimony, Apple’s search chief John Giannandrea claimed that because DuckDuckGo relies on Bing for its search results (an engine Apple apparently considered buying), it probably also sends some user data to Microsoft, meaning its “marketing about privacy is somewhat incongruent with the details.”

Despite those concerns over the sharing of user data, Apple opted to continue to use Google, a company whose data-gathering policies are both well-known and widespread. Given Apple’s frequent habit of promoting its devices’ privacy-protecting features, that may look like a strange decision.

Yet as testimony in the ongoing trial has claimed, Apple has a very profitable arrangement with Google, with the search giant reportedly paying Apple at least $8 billion a year to remain the default Safari search engine. Apple’s services head Eddy Cue has also testified that Apple stuck with Google because it felt it was the best option available.

Regardless, you can still change your default search engine in Safari (and many of the other leading browsers) if you want more privacy protection than Google offers.

Alex Blake
Alex Blake has been working with Digital Trends since 2019, where he spends most of his time writing about Mac computers…
Google’s new Magic Pointer Play Store listing reveals a Gemini shortcut built for Googlebooks
The unannounced app turns the cursor into a contextual AI tool for search, image creation, and shopping
Plant, Text, Business Card

Google has quietly published a new Play Store listing for Magic Pointer, an unannounced app built for Googlebooks. Updated on July 10, the app turns the cursor into a Gemini shortcut that can act on whatever a user selects on screen.

Magic Pointer can send an image to Lens, generate a related image, or surface a shopping action without forcing users to open a separate chatbot. Regular Android devices currently show as incompatible, so the listing offers an early preview rather than a broad release.

Read more
You can stop using AI, but this new report says you probably can’t escape it
A UK survey found that most people feel AI exposure is unavoidable, raising harder questions about consent, privacy, and whether opting out is still realistic
AI Chatbots

More people are trying to use less AI, but avoiding it altogether may already be impossible.

A survey of 2,055 UK adults found that 42% deliberately limit how much AI they use. Another 70% said avoiding AI exposure would be difficult or impossible, even when they actively wanted less of it.

Read more
The face on an AI interviewer may matter as much as the decision it makes
Researchers found that race and gender matching changed how fairly rejected applicants viewed an automated interview, even though everyone received the same outcome
File, Computer Hardware, Electronics

An AI hiring system can treat every applicant the same and still leave some people feeling targeted. Researchers found that rejected candidates judged an automated interview differently depending on the race and gender of the avatar delivering the result.

Around 220 participants completed a simulated interview for a fictional customer support role with one of four photorealistic AI avatars. Everyone was rejected, yet perceptions of fairness shifted with the interviewer’s appearance. An algorithm audit could miss that reaction because candidates don’t experience the system as raw code. They experience a face asking questions and judging their answers.

Read more