It can't both be redundant and be solved by moving one of the interfaces somewhere else. > All the functionality is already built into Chrome right here: > So move it somewhere where it makes more sense. Maybe you will succeed going down the ad-route, but I personally want a different option to having my results stuffed with ads, rather than just a new (either better or worse) Google.Īs soon as you do a paid version of search I'll be a subscriber, as long as there is a guarantee that it is privacy-preserving, will never have ads, is a sensible price and isn't linked to some weird crypto stuff. Why can't we just have a search company that will just let me pay them money in a straightforward 1950's-style transaction.Īll I'm saying is - Please don't try to beat Google Search at being Google Search with the same ads-in-search model - you have such a great opportunity, and clearly the experience, to do something different! I personally hope you choose a different path that allows you to have a better ad-free product. That's the whole point of my post - if you need revenue just charge me for it. The issue with me being advertised to isnt that I want a cut of the revenue, it's that I don't want to be advertised to. ![]() I personally don't want revenue sharing - I just want the first browser that is user-first and private. > We're the only user-first, private browser with opt-in revenue sharing. These seem pretty cut-and-dry, but if they are false they should definitely retract. I might be confused, but was the below article just false? If so you should probably ask them to put a correction on it. ![]() If you found a monetisation strategy that didn't involve Ads, theoretically it should be easier to offer a better quality search result and better quality product than Google (because you are actually focussing on delivering the best quality results rather than the right mix of good-results and Ads to optimise revenue). If you are competing with Google by releasing a free search engine with Ads, you have to provide better search results with Ads mixed in than Google which will be tough. I would love a company like DuckDuckGo or Brave to offer a paid tier where I can just subscribe to an ad-free search engine (I would love Google to offer a 'Google Premium' with this, but let's be real that's not happening!). They haven't tried monetising search yet so - Brave if you are reading this - please please please choose a different monetisation strategy and use the opportunity to be different to Google! Looking at Brave's monetisation strategy for their browser it seems pretty shady (effectively steal the revenue from site owners for referral links and replace the websites ads with their own ads). I've just tried brave search and it does seem to be a good product actually - my only concern with all these providers is what is the monetisation strategy will be (Brave has called out ads, but it's not in their product at the moment).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |