Google doesn't owe you anything, it's their service and we use their search engine for free. They'd scoff at every single lawsuit, if it ever got that far. It might be a bad product decision.
And organizing the app store based on app-store SEO is wise, opens up a new market and forces devs to reconsider their app design.
But keeping the same UX is harmful in this situation -- on SMS it's a common pattern to use text commands, but in the desktop context you'd never expect it (and the commands don't make sense).
I worked at Amazon and we found (to our surprise) that power users were using these commands from the build in Kindle tweeting functionality.
I think the number of power users using this feature is probably actually higher than the number of false positives of exactly 2 word tweets where the first is get
If they buy Square, they'll be 30% of the way there with the infrastructure along with market penetration. Make the Square app a native app, and change it's name to iPay and you're golden. Also... no more dividends.
They would have to compete at microtransaction rates to hang with Paypal or Amazon outside the native appstore probably unless they tack on some digital content/storage costs to get 10-30%, i.e. iCloud surcharge.
I'd like to add the Knicks gave serious consideration to cutting him from the roster hours before his first start because his 30-day contract was set to expire in a few days.
I'll bet you that with Facebook, there's no Groupon-like 50%-restatement. To be more concrete, between first and final S-1, I'll say no more than a 5% restatement of revenues in the downward direction. Facebook is not in the same panicked 'damn the torpedos' rush as Groupon was.
I don't get why people seem to ignore this. If facebook added internet search to their site they would instantly become the second biggest provider. I would be very surprised if they weren't already working on this.
People go to FB to communicate, they go to G to search. Brands are associated with products. That's why this G+ thing is a bad idea, it totally waters down G's brand in search. FB offers Bing on their site, but still nobody uses that.
I don't think this is true for most people. This has been discussed on HN a few times. While the techie crowd usually has distinct sites for different purposes, this isn't true for most people. Facebook is the only thing a large number of people get on the internet for. Portals work at engaging visitors, it's just a matter of monetizing the eyeballs. Facebook has the engagement locked down, now they just need to monetize the eyeballs.
FB may have Bing search integrated, but its not in any prominent location. I've been on facebook for years and have never seen it, not once. Perhaps its integrated with facebook's people search? The point is, if they put a plain-ol internet search box on each users homepage it will get plenty of use. With the plenthora of data they're generating, internet search can be trojan horsed by way of a history/activity search.
But for people who are already on facebook its natural to just use the search box that's 5 inches away. For better or worse, facebook is the new homepage of the internet for a lot of people. There are endless ways they can monetize this.
There is a great play around the collection of data outside of just social space. Hunch has done a great job aggregating this data via a social means and displaying the data to the masses in an appealing way to drive more people towards their "recommendation" engine. I work for a site called Ranker and we're focused on a similar data play with much greater focus on SEO.
And organizing the app store based on app-store SEO is wise, opens up a new market and forces devs to reconsider their app design.