7 ms·

We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: 1. On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked int

We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: 1. On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked into OS, we have a fiddly extension that hooks outbound calls to /search and redirects them but I wish we didn't need to. 2. On Chrome, we use an extension to change the default search engine and enable search auto-complete etc, but Google has a policy that such an extension can do one thing and one thing only, and recently removed our extension on account of that [1]. We rebuilt it to meet their needs but had a lot of back-and-forth because we included 'search by image' on a context menu item and the first reviewer felt that was a bridge too far. You'll note that Chrome provides such a context menu item for Google Image search out of the box. 3. On Chrome for Linux, the default search engine API is not available, so Linux users have to configure it manually through a series of silly steps [2]. This is at least in keeping with most Linux experiences. There are other issues, but I say all this to highlight how surprisingly difficult it is to change this setting in a practical, consumer friendly way. It is most certainly this difficult by design, that's a lot of revenue to protect. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41028924 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41028924 2: https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic?tab=readme-ov-file#setting-default-search-on-linux https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic?tab=rea...

trelane 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
hintymad 2y ago
> On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked into OS, we have a fiddly extension that hooks outbound calls to /search and redirects them but I wish we didn't need to. Wouldn't this be the fault of Apple as it is Apple that controls the list?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- srcreigh 2y ago
  Apple could be getting paid off by google to keep this aspect of search difficult to change.
  - arresin 2y ago
    $20 billion in 2022 according to the verge via court docs: https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147007/google-paid-apple-20-billion-in-2022-to-be-safaris-default-search-engine https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147007/google-paid-apple...
    - lupire 2y ago
      If these hypothetically had no impact on the rest of the business, and were just an arbitrary payment, they would be the difference between Google having more profit than Apple, and vice versa.
    - crazygringo 2y ago
      No, absolutely not -- that says nothing whatsoever about making the default difficult to change. It's just about what the default is.
      - CapstanRoller 2y ago
        It "says nothing whatsoever" only if you fell off the turnip truck yesterday, or have a vested interest in defending a massive corporation.
      - srcreigh 2y ago
        The “make search difficult to change” is more obviously anti trust worthy, and if they did make this deal I would not be surprised if they were careful to not write anything down. (Not to mention google deleting chats against court orders)
init2null 2y ago
There's no excuse for not making search engine management as simple and flexible as Firefox does, especially on the desktop, but I appreciate the hoops you jump through to keep hacks available for browsers with less user choice.
- everfrustrated 2y ago
  This would be the same Firefox that changed my default search from Kagi to Google after a routine update?
  - init2null 2y ago
    I've never had that happen and wouldn't appreciate it. Corrupted configuration maybe?
  - sitkack 2y ago
    Kagi on Firefox requires an extension, which is ridiculous. I am about to find a more user friendly browser. Session, bookmarking and history search haven’t seen any meaningful improvement in 15+ years.
    - Kbelicius 2y ago
      > Kagi on Firefox requires an extension It doesn't.
- mrob 2y ago
  Firefox makes you jump through hoops too. To enable the UI for adding custom search engines you need to set the undocumented preference "browser.urlbar.update2.engineAliasRefresh" to true.
  - init2null 2y ago
    I meant changing it in Preferences though, and not a drop-down like it used to be. You can add completely new engines, change defaults, and even give them keywords for quick searches without any undocumented change.
WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
> We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: I use Kagi's extensions to maintain Kagi as default search across many devices and browsers. It's been seamless across Firefox/Waterfox/etc instances. IIRC, Kiwi and Brave were fairly agreeable (I avoid Chrome, Edge). Opera was a pain because Opera is a pain about everything. I appreciate the effort you+team have put into this.
- prophesi 2y ago
  I did have issues on Linux regarding the extension working in private windows due to the official Firefox extension being out-of-date. Using the latest Github release of their extension fixed it, and they promptly submitted the new update for it to propagate through the extension store after a ticket on their feedback forum asked about it[0]. Github releases with .xpi's to install have been removed[1] which is odd but hopefully they keep up with their Firefox extension submissions if this is the route they're going down. As for Chrome, I only use it for automated/manual testing since that's what everyone uses. [0] https://kagifeedback.org/d/2234-kagi-extension-api-key-not-persistent-in-firefox-esr-on-kali-linux/25 https://kagifeedback.org/d/2234-kagi-extension-api-key-not-p... [1] https://github.com/kagisearch/browser_extensions/releases https://github.com/kagisearch/browser_extensions/releases
  - hugh_kagi 2y ago
    We're definitely keeping the extensions going, just need to prioritise a few parts internally. You can just git clone the new chrome extension and 'load unpacked' if that's of any use. It's extremely simple. https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic
    - prophesi 2y ago
      Any advice to Firefox users who want to do the same? I don't use Chrome or its derivatives.
jd3 2y ago
I'm surprised Kagi Search wasn't mentioned once in the ruling given that it's the most compelling Google competitor on the market.
- dartos 2y ago
  I think openai is the most notable org taking swings at Google. At least Google seems to feel that way. Might just be the Silicon Valley bubble
  - jd3 2y ago
    While true, it is also notable that ChatGPT is not a search engine, SearchGPT is not live yet, and that AI results have only further diminished the quality of search results in Google Search. If anything, OpenAI has only served to further exacerbate and accelerate the inevitable decline of Google Search.
    - dartos 2y ago
      So you agree? ChatGPT isn’t marketed as a search engine, but it’s essentially how it’s used. SearchGPT is a recognition of that. And yeah OpenAI is making Google search worse _and_ providing a solution at the same time. Sounds like a run at Google to me.
- mbreese 2y ago
  Specifically, it's the most compelling competitor that isn't included in the default iOS search engine list...
- WheatMillington 2y ago
  Tell me you live in a tech bubble without telling me you live in a tech bubble.
  - jd3 2y ago
    I do deep research for a living and it's the only search engine I've tried that returns superior results over Google Search.
CapmCrackaWaka 2y ago
I use Orion exclusively because Kagi is the default search engine. It does have a few more bugs than chrome / safari, but they're well worth putting up with to get native Kagi support. Thank you. It's interesting though - what is Apple's vested interest in only having native support for certain search engines? I now no longer use their browser because of this - I would think that is _some_ kind of loss for them. Maybe not, since I'm on macOS anyway.
- mandevil 2y ago
  According to sworn testimony, Apple got over 20 billion dollars from Google in 2022. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-01/google-s-payments-to-apple-reached-20-billion-in-2022-cue-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-01/google-s-...
  - matwood 2y ago
    That's to have Google be default. It doesn't explain why it's impossible to add others to the list.
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      I can think of 20 billion reasons.
    - trentnix 2y ago
      I think the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to figure it out.
      - bee_rider 2y ago
        Are we supposing that Google made their payment conditional on obfuscating the ability to switch search engines?
        mminer237 2y ago
Ferret7446 2y ago
1. That sounds like an Apple issue, not a Google issue 2. That sounds perfectly reasonable. Google doesn't want people to bundle other things for users who want to install just a different default search (and not "your hotbar" like the Netscape days). 3. I'm not sure what you're talking about, is Chrome on Linux default search configured differently than Chrome on Windows?
- currysausage 2y ago
  > That sounds like an Apple issue True. But guess who’s paying Apple good money in order to remain the default search engine. Who knows what else might be part of this deal?
  - Ferret7446 2y ago
    Moving the goalposts? This is about the list of allowed baked in search engines, not what the default is.
  - fallingknife 2y ago
    Everybody who has read the contract. What are you alleging?
    - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
      Antitrust breach, market manipulation, collusion, wage suppression - basically the usual stuff they do. Oh, and when they agreed to suppress wages through an anti-poaching agreement, was that explicit in the contract? https://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/ https://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/
      - fallingknife 2y ago
        WTF does that have to do with the default search agreement? You just listed a bunch of unrelated bad things companies did.
milofeynman 2y ago
Lets not kid ourselves. This wasn't a random reviewer giving you a hard time, your extension is definitely being "reviewed" way up the chain in order to find any menial reason to not allow you.
asddubs 2y ago
>2. On Chrome, we use an extension to change the default search engine and enable search auto-complete etc, but Google has a policy that such an extension can do one thing and one thing only, and recently removed our extension on account of that [1]. We rebuilt it to meet their needs but had a lot of back-and-forth because we included 'search by image' on a context menu item and the first reviewer felt that was a bridge too far. You'll note that Chrome provides such a context menu item for Google Image search out of the box. I guess this is so that unrelated extension X can't also change the default search while it's at it, like in the good old IE days, so it kind of sort of makes sense. though if the extension is named after a search engine it should probably get a pass, and the context menu thing obviously is also related to search.
- foobarding 2y ago
  Yes this is exactly right. There is an industry of chrome extensions that exist to change the search engine to something truly unwanted (yahoo search anyone?) so that the extension author can extract rev share. They often advertise the extension as something else to trick people into installing. The target is often kids. As someone who worked at Google, I was surprised / shocked to see how many kids get targeted by these extensions. “Want to play this cool game? Just install this extension.” It is a really problematic thing without an obvious solution. Google has to fight against unwanted extensions but absolutely shouldn’t hide behind that acting like it is okay to punish competing search engines in the process.
  - foobarding 2y ago
    Also in case you were curious what tipped me off was seeing just how common it is for Chromebooks to not have Google as their default search engine. Totally not the intended outcome of Google creating Chrome OS.
gregdoesit 2y ago
I’m one of the paying Kagi customer who wants to make Kagi my default iOS search engine, but cannot. It’s maddening that even though I paid for both my iPhone / iPad and for Kagi, Apple for some reason makes it impossible for me to make this choice (that I already made by paying for Kagi). On Chrome at least this is possible, even if it’s additional steps (I have not used the extension though there.)
- te_chris 2y ago
  Some few billion reasons*
- hcurtiss 2y ago
  I too am a paying customer. Surprisingly -- at least to me -- it's easy to do with Microsoft's Edge browser on iOS. I use it as default on both iOS and macOS.
  - everfrustrated 2y ago
    It's only easy now because Microsoft had a lot of runs in with the US and EU regulators on this specific issue in the past.
    - lozenge 2y ago
      And because MS wants to increase its userbase on IOS and macOS. Meanwhile Windows Start Menu is locked to Edge and Bing.
      - rkagerer 2y ago
        Meanwhile Windows Start Menu is locked to Edge and Bing Why does software suck these days.
        fragmede 2y ago
        Because the money for it is stuck in weird places. I can't write some small bit of software and just sell that for a decent price. People don't pay for software these days, so my best hope is to give it away for free and then running ads. And then, if it's any good, someone will come by and make an open source clone and give that away for free, tanking sales/ad revenue. So the money in writing software is by working at a huge company that has found money with software, like Google and selling ads.
layer8 2y ago
Since you are also operating in the EU, it sounds like you could bring these issues up with the Commission.
otterley 2y ago
Have you engaged Apple about registering your search engine? How's that process going?
- crossroadsguy 2y ago
  Apple might ask for that in(famous) 30% cut. Or is it 40 now?
throwaway88222 2y ago
As someone who worked at Mozilla, on Firefox browsers, I can guarantee you that none of this is a coincidence. I have never seen the search contract so I don't think I am breaking any kind of NDA but I have been close enough to engineering and browser planning and product management to know that Google dictates (negotiates?) in great detail every aspect of search in the browser. This is not a simple "you can use Google Search" deal, instead Google is basically the product manager and ux designer for the browser and they spell out in the contract how search works, how the navigation works, what the UX looks like, what is allowed and not allowed in terms of competing search engines. On mobile it goes further than that and they also dictate how the browser integrates with Android features related to search and voice search. Mozilla can't surive without Google cash and I fully believe they negotiated hard for a good fair deal that puts users and choice first but I am also sure that Google got the better hand and that is why Search in Firefox has been largely "product managed" / micro-managed by Google. Apple probably had much more freedom becsuse of their size and power and I don't really understand why it is not possible to add a custom search engine. There is no advantage for Apple to not allow this. Other than .. Google probably force a good deal in their advantage? Apple taking more money by allowing less choice, or even being forced to accept a new deal? Not having a search deal is simply not an option. Mozilla would die. Apple would have to explain billions of revenue loss to shareholders. Both are impossible.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  It used to be pretty common for computer-illiterate people to add a bunch of extra search bars and other weird hotbars, often of ill-repute, by accident. Maybe Apple just didn’t want to repeat that.
  - callalex 2y ago
    The status quo in fact encourages going back to the toolbar-infested days of yore. The only way to use a non-bribe-paying search engine in Safari is to install a browser extension with access to every webpage. There are standards that work just fine for switching search engines without any extensions or toolbars but Apple explicitly rejects those standards.
fantasybuilder 2y ago
I use only Kagi on all my devices. Thank you for building a phenomenal search engine. On iOS my Safari browser is always in private mode. I never use non-private tabs. Kagi integration via the Safari extension works most of the time - but was broken for several months (required re-logging into Kagi when opening a new private tab after a delay). It looks like you fixed it just a couple of weeks ago, so I appreciate that. I am raising this just so you are aware of this use case - always staying in private mode. (The fact that iOS doesn't allow setting the default search provider in Safari to anything other than half a dozen of pre-selected partners is abysmal.)
kemiller 2y ago
I like your product but find the inability to set it as default very aggravating. Your plugin has improved a lot but it’s still janky. I blame Apple as much as Google. They could choose to align with users but instead they made Safari a profit center with Google’s collusion.
omeid2 2y ago
> This is at least in keeping with most Linux experiences. I guess, all that we get from Google, we deserve it.
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
"It is most certainly this difficult by design, that's a lot of revenue to protect." Reading the early history of Microsoft I once came across a quote from someone that the company intentionally made the possibility of booting different operating systems on the PC difficult by design. What I found interesting is that this was before Linux became popular. They were already contemplating the possibility of booting other operating systems. Google's argument at trial was something like, "Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively." (Hence it should be set as a "default".) Could we imagine Microsoft arguing, "Everyone agrees Windows is the best and that's why they will never want to boot another operating system." Maybe some relics of this sort of subtle subterfuge live on today. For example, it was historically difficult if not impossible to dual boot Windows along with non-Microsoft OS without allowing Windows to be first in the boot order, e.g., Windows partition must be the first partition. Even in the UEFI era, I see hints that this issue may still persist: https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/u9siuc/how_does_windows_10_keep_changing_my_damn_boot/?rdt=55956 https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/u9siuc/how_... Regardless of whether I have the details exactly right (I used to edit MBRs by hand to set the first active partition and have forgotten much of that knowledge now), the point is that the software/"tech" company tactic of preserving or adding deliberate hassles, i.e., "friction", is an old one. Surely it must work to have persisted for so long.
- thayne 2y ago
  > Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively. What a specious argument. Just because it is the best now[1], doesn't mean it is the best possible, and blocking competition can prevent something that is better from gaining traction. [1]:which is itself debatable, and I question if any search engine can unilaterally be the best since different engines may be better in different situations
- mrkramer 2y ago
  >Google's argument at trial was something like, "Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively." Hence the logical question is: why is Google collectively paying billions of dollars to Apple and Mozilla if they are so sure they have the best search engine in the industry? I think they know that they do not have the best search engine possible and they just want to control the whole distribution channel both vertically and horizontally. Imo, long story short; Google is house of cards built of Google Search, Google Chrome and Android and if you take one card out the whole structure would collapse. They came to realize by observing Microsoft that if you control distribution channels, you control the end product and I think their weakest link is Chrome. So anyone who can create better internet browser than Google's Chrome can disrupt Google's dominion over the Web.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tomjen3 2y ago
Ah that’s why you removed the “summerize” this page option from extension? I must say I really hated that change, hopefully you will consider making a new extension?
carlosjobim 2y ago
I've said this before, but it bears repeating: Kagi should stop blaming Apple or Google and make your own app already. People love apps and would be very happy to search by opening your app instead of using weird and suspicious hacks. As a for-profit company you cannot fall back on the comfort of blaming outside factors for your problems. You have the best search engine in the world already, so don't make it so difficult for people to become your (paying) users.

trelane 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

hintymad 2y ago

> On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked into OS, we have a fiddly extension that hooks outbound calls to /search and redirects them but I wish we didn't need to. Wouldn't this be the fault of Apple as it is Apple that controls the list?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
srcreigh 2y ago
Apple could be getting paid off by google to keep this aspect of search difficult to change.
- arresin 2y ago
  $20 billion in 2022 according to the verge via court docs: https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147007/google-paid-apple-20-billion-in-2022-to-be-safaris-default-search-engine https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147007/google-paid-apple...
  - lupire 2y ago
    If these hypothetically had no impact on the rest of the business, and were just an arbitrary payment, they would be the difference between Google having more profit than Apple, and vice versa.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    No, absolutely not -- that says nothing whatsoever about making the default difficult to change. It's just about what the default is.
    - CapstanRoller 2y ago
      It "says nothing whatsoever" only if you fell off the turnip truck yesterday, or have a vested interest in defending a massive corporation.
    - srcreigh 2y ago
      The “make search difficult to change” is more obviously anti trust worthy, and if they did make this deal I would not be surprised if they were careful to not write anything down. (Not to mention google deleting chats against court orders)

init2null 2y ago

There's no excuse for not making search engine management as simple and flexible as Firefox does, especially on the desktop, but I appreciate the hoops you jump through to keep hacks available for browsers with less user choice.

everfrustrated 2y ago
This would be the same Firefox that changed my default search from Kagi to Google after a routine update?
- init2null 2y ago
  I've never had that happen and wouldn't appreciate it. Corrupted configuration maybe?
- sitkack 2y ago
  Kagi on Firefox requires an extension, which is ridiculous. I am about to find a more user friendly browser. Session, bookmarking and history search haven’t seen any meaningful improvement in 15+ years.
  - Kbelicius 2y ago
    > Kagi on Firefox requires an extension It doesn't.
mrob 2y ago
Firefox makes you jump through hoops too. To enable the UI for adding custom search engines you need to set the undocumented preference "browser.urlbar.update2.engineAliasRefresh" to true.
- init2null 2y ago
  I meant changing it in Preferences though, and not a drop-down like it used to be. You can add completely new engines, change defaults, and even give them keywords for quick searches without any undocumented change.

WarOnPrivacy 2y ago

> We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: I use Kagi's extensions to maintain Kagi as default search across many devices and browsers. It's been seamless across Firefox/Waterfox/etc instances. IIRC, Kiwi and Brave were fairly agreeable (I avoid Chrome, Edge). Opera was a pain because Opera is a pain about everything. I appreciate the effort you+team have put into this.

prophesi 2y ago
I did have issues on Linux regarding the extension working in private windows due to the official Firefox extension being out-of-date. Using the latest Github release of their extension fixed it, and they promptly submitted the new update for it to propagate through the extension store after a ticket on their feedback forum asked about it[0]. Github releases with .xpi's to install have been removed[1] which is odd but hopefully they keep up with their Firefox extension submissions if this is the route they're going down. As for Chrome, I only use it for automated/manual testing since that's what everyone uses. [0] https://kagifeedback.org/d/2234-kagi-extension-api-key-not-persistent-in-firefox-esr-on-kali-linux/25 https://kagifeedback.org/d/2234-kagi-extension-api-key-not-p... [1] https://github.com/kagisearch/browser_extensions/releases https://github.com/kagisearch/browser_extensions/releases
- hugh_kagi 2y ago
  We're definitely keeping the extensions going, just need to prioritise a few parts internally. You can just git clone the new chrome extension and 'load unpacked' if that's of any use. It's extremely simple. https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic https://github.com/kagisearch/chrome_extension_basic
  - prophesi 2y ago
    Any advice to Firefox users who want to do the same? I don't use Chrome or its derivatives.

jd3 2y ago

I'm surprised Kagi Search wasn't mentioned once in the ruling given that it's the most compelling Google competitor on the market.

dartos 2y ago
I think openai is the most notable org taking swings at Google. At least Google seems to feel that way. Might just be the Silicon Valley bubble
- jd3 2y ago
  While true, it is also notable that ChatGPT is not a search engine, SearchGPT is not live yet, and that AI results have only further diminished the quality of search results in Google Search. If anything, OpenAI has only served to further exacerbate and accelerate the inevitable decline of Google Search.
  - dartos 2y ago
    So you agree? ChatGPT isn’t marketed as a search engine, but it’s essentially how it’s used. SearchGPT is a recognition of that. And yeah OpenAI is making Google search worse _and_ providing a solution at the same time. Sounds like a run at Google to me.
mbreese 2y ago
Specifically, it's the most compelling competitor that isn't included in the default iOS search engine list...
WheatMillington 2y ago
Tell me you live in a tech bubble without telling me you live in a tech bubble.
- jd3 2y ago
  I do deep research for a living and it's the only search engine I've tried that returns superior results over Google Search.

CapmCrackaWaka 2y ago

I use Orion exclusively because Kagi is the default search engine. It does have a few more bugs than chrome / safari, but they're well worth putting up with to get native Kagi support. Thank you. It's interesting though - what is Apple's vested interest in only having native support for certain search engines? I now no longer use their browser because of this - I would think that is _some_ kind of loss for them. Maybe not, since I'm on macOS anyway.

mandevil 2y ago
According to sworn testimony, Apple got over 20 billion dollars from Google in 2022. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-01/google-s-payments-to-apple-reached-20-billion-in-2022-cue-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-01/google-s-...
- matwood 2y ago
  That's to have Google be default. It doesn't explain why it's impossible to add others to the list.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    I can think of 20 billion reasons.
  - trentnix 2y ago
    I think the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to figure it out.
    - bee_rider 2y ago
      Are we supposing that Google made their payment conditional on obfuscating the ability to switch search engines?
      - mminer237 2y ago

Ferret7446 2y ago

1. That sounds like an Apple issue, not a Google issue 2. That sounds perfectly reasonable. Google doesn't want people to bundle other things for users who want to install just a different default search (and not "your hotbar" like the Netscape days). 3. I'm not sure what you're talking about, is Chrome on Linux default search configured differently than Chrome on Windows?

currysausage 2y ago
> That sounds like an Apple issue True. But guess who’s paying Apple good money in order to remain the default search engine. Who knows what else might be part of this deal?
- Ferret7446 2y ago
  Moving the goalposts? This is about the list of allowed baked in search engines, not what the default is.
- fallingknife 2y ago
  Everybody who has read the contract. What are you alleging?
  - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
    Antitrust breach, market manipulation, collusion, wage suppression - basically the usual stuff they do. Oh, and when they agreed to suppress wages through an anti-poaching agreement, was that explicit in the contract? https://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/ https://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/
    - fallingknife 2y ago
      WTF does that have to do with the default search agreement? You just listed a bunch of unrelated bad things companies did.

milofeynman 2y ago

Lets not kid ourselves. This wasn't a random reviewer giving you a hard time, your extension is definitely being "reviewed" way up the chain in order to find any menial reason to not allow you.

asddubs 2y ago

>2. On Chrome, we use an extension to change the default search engine and enable search auto-complete etc, but Google has a policy that such an extension can do one thing and one thing only, and recently removed our extension on account of that [1]. We rebuilt it to meet their needs but had a lot of back-and-forth because we included 'search by image' on a context menu item and the first reviewer felt that was a bridge too far. You'll note that Chrome provides such a context menu item for Google Image search out of the box. I guess this is so that unrelated extension X can't also change the default search while it's at it, like in the good old IE days, so it kind of sort of makes sense. though if the extension is named after a search engine it should probably get a pass, and the context menu thing obviously is also related to search.

foobarding 2y ago
Yes this is exactly right. There is an industry of chrome extensions that exist to change the search engine to something truly unwanted (yahoo search anyone?) so that the extension author can extract rev share. They often advertise the extension as something else to trick people into installing. The target is often kids. As someone who worked at Google, I was surprised / shocked to see how many kids get targeted by these extensions. “Want to play this cool game? Just install this extension.” It is a really problematic thing without an obvious solution. Google has to fight against unwanted extensions but absolutely shouldn’t hide behind that acting like it is okay to punish competing search engines in the process.
- foobarding 2y ago
  Also in case you were curious what tipped me off was seeing just how common it is for Chromebooks to not have Google as their default search engine. Totally not the intended outcome of Google creating Chrome OS.

gregdoesit 2y ago

I’m one of the paying Kagi customer who wants to make Kagi my default iOS search engine, but cannot. It’s maddening that even though I paid for both my iPhone / iPad and for Kagi, Apple for some reason makes it impossible for me to make this choice (that I already made by paying for Kagi). On Chrome at least this is possible, even if it’s additional steps (I have not used the extension though there.)

te_chris 2y ago
Some few billion reasons*
hcurtiss 2y ago
I too am a paying customer. Surprisingly -- at least to me -- it's easy to do with Microsoft's Edge browser on iOS. I use it as default on both iOS and macOS.
- everfrustrated 2y ago
  It's only easy now because Microsoft had a lot of runs in with the US and EU regulators on this specific issue in the past.
  - lozenge 2y ago
    And because MS wants to increase its userbase on IOS and macOS. Meanwhile Windows Start Menu is locked to Edge and Bing.
    - rkagerer 2y ago
      Meanwhile Windows Start Menu is locked to Edge and Bing Why does software suck these days.
      - fragmede 2y ago
        Because the money for it is stuck in weird places. I can't write some small bit of software and just sell that for a decent price. People don't pay for software these days, so my best hope is to give it away for free and then running ads. And then, if it's any good, someone will come by and make an open source clone and give that away for free, tanking sales/ad revenue. So the money in writing software is by working at a huge company that has found money with software, like Google and selling ads.

layer8 2y ago

Since you are also operating in the EU, it sounds like you could bring these issues up with the Commission.

otterley 2y ago

Have you engaged Apple about registering your search engine? How's that process going?

crossroadsguy 2y ago
Apple might ask for that in(famous) 30% cut. Or is it 40 now?

throwaway88222 2y ago

As someone who worked at Mozilla, on Firefox browsers, I can guarantee you that none of this is a coincidence. I have never seen the search contract so I don't think I am breaking any kind of NDA but I have been close enough to engineering and browser planning and product management to know that Google dictates (negotiates?) in great detail every aspect of search in the browser. This is not a simple "you can use Google Search" deal, instead Google is basically the product manager and ux designer for the browser and they spell out in the contract how search works, how the navigation works, what the UX looks like, what is allowed and not allowed in terms of competing search engines. On mobile it goes further than that and they also dictate how the browser integrates with Android features related to search and voice search. Mozilla can't surive without Google cash and I fully believe they negotiated hard for a good fair deal that puts users and choice first but I am also sure that Google got the better hand and that is why Search in Firefox has been largely "product managed" / micro-managed by Google. Apple probably had much more freedom becsuse of their size and power and I don't really understand why it is not possible to add a custom search engine. There is no advantage for Apple to not allow this. Other than .. Google probably force a good deal in their advantage? Apple taking more money by allowing less choice, or even being forced to accept a new deal? Not having a search deal is simply not an option. Mozilla would die. Apple would have to explain billions of revenue loss to shareholders. Both are impossible.

bee_rider 2y ago
It used to be pretty common for computer-illiterate people to add a bunch of extra search bars and other weird hotbars, often of ill-repute, by accident. Maybe Apple just didn’t want to repeat that.
- callalex 2y ago
  The status quo in fact encourages going back to the toolbar-infested days of yore. The only way to use a non-bribe-paying search engine in Safari is to install a browser extension with access to every webpage. There are standards that work just fine for switching search engines without any extensions or toolbars but Apple explicitly rejects those standards.

fantasybuilder 2y ago

I use only Kagi on all my devices. Thank you for building a phenomenal search engine. On iOS my Safari browser is always in private mode. I never use non-private tabs. Kagi integration via the Safari extension works most of the time - but was broken for several months (required re-logging into Kagi when opening a new private tab after a delay). It looks like you fixed it just a couple of weeks ago, so I appreciate that. I am raising this just so you are aware of this use case - always staying in private mode. (The fact that iOS doesn't allow setting the default search provider in Safari to anything other than half a dozen of pre-selected partners is abysmal.)

kemiller 2y ago

I like your product but find the inability to set it as default very aggravating. Your plugin has improved a lot but it’s still janky. I blame Apple as much as Google. They could choose to align with users but instead they made Safari a profit center with Google’s collusion.

omeid2 2y ago

> This is at least in keeping with most Linux experiences. I guess, all that we get from Google, we deserve it.

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

"It is most certainly this difficult by design, that's a lot of revenue to protect." Reading the early history of Microsoft I once came across a quote from someone that the company intentionally made the possibility of booting different operating systems on the PC difficult by design. What I found interesting is that this was before Linux became popular. They were already contemplating the possibility of booting other operating systems. Google's argument at trial was something like, "Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively." (Hence it should be set as a "default".) Could we imagine Microsoft arguing, "Everyone agrees Windows is the best and that's why they will never want to boot another operating system." Maybe some relics of this sort of subtle subterfuge live on today. For example, it was historically difficult if not impossible to dual boot Windows along with non-Microsoft OS without allowing Windows to be first in the boot order, e.g., Windows partition must be the first partition. Even in the UEFI era, I see hints that this issue may still persist: https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/u9siuc/how_does_windows_10_keep_changing_my_damn_boot/?rdt=55956 https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/u9siuc/how_... Regardless of whether I have the details exactly right (I used to edit MBRs by hand to set the first active partition and have forgotten much of that knowledge now), the point is that the software/"tech" company tactic of preserving or adding deliberate hassles, i.e., "friction", is an old one. Surely it must work to have persisted for so long.

thayne 2y ago
> Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively. What a specious argument. Just because it is the best now[1], doesn't mean it is the best possible, and blocking competition can prevent something that is better from gaining traction. [1]:which is itself debatable, and I question if any search engine can unilaterally be the best since different engines may be better in different situations
mrkramer 2y ago
>Google's argument at trial was something like, "Everyone agrees Google search is the best and that's why they use it exclusively." Hence the logical question is: why is Google collectively paying billions of dollars to Apple and Mozilla if they are so sure they have the best search engine in the industry? I think they know that they do not have the best search engine possible and they just want to control the whole distribution channel both vertically and horizontally. Imo, long story short; Google is house of cards built of Google Search, Google Chrome and Android and if you take one card out the whole structure would collapse. They came to realize by observing Microsoft that if you control distribution channels, you control the end product and I think their weakest link is Chrome. So anyone who can create better internet browser than Google's Chrome can disrupt Google's dominion over the Web.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tomjen3 2y ago

Ah that’s why you removed the “summerize” this page option from extension? I must say I really hated that change, hopefully you will consider making a new extension?

carlosjobim 2y ago

I've said this before, but it bears repeating: Kagi should stop blaming Apple or Google and make your own app already. People love apps and would be very happy to search by opening your app instead of using weird and suspicious hacks. As a for-profit company you cannot fall back on the comfort of blaming outside factors for your problems. You have the best search engine in the world already, so don't make it so difficult for people to become your (paying) users.