Slashdot Mirror


Google Outs 3D Maps For iOS Ahead of Apple

hypnosec writes "Apple announced during WWDC 2012 that it is going to ditch Google maps and bring out its own under iOS 6. So, Google started working and in fact raced ahead of Apple in providing 3D maps for iOS. Through a blog post, Google announced that it has now made 3D imagery available on its Google Earth for iOS app. Users of iPhone 4S, iPad 2 or new iPad, while using Google Earth for iOS app, will feel that they are virtually flying over cities.The feature, as of now, works only for 12 regions. Cities for which the 3D imagery is provided are from US with an expectation of a city in Rome. The U.S. cities include: Boulder, Colo., Boston, Charlotte, N.C., Lawrence, Kan., Long Beach, Calif., Los Angeles, Portland, Ore., San Diego, Santa Cruz, Calif., Tampa, Fla., Tucson, Ariz., and San Francisco, plus its East Bay and Peninsula neighbors, notes the blog post."

197 comments

  1. Lawrence Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lawrence Kansas in 3D? Why bother. They'd probably do the rest of the towns in Kansas but then people might figure out the trick.

    1. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps because its a pretty big college town and my guess is one of the developers studied at KU or a KU student provided the 3-D models of the town.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by only_human · · Score: 1

      Oddly Kansas City, home to Google's high fiber regimen is merely 40 miles away. So they will be able to zoom virtually in high speed and then hop in a car to see the real thing in less than an hour.

    3. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by mickmel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's where Brian McClendon (he co-founded Keyhole, which became Google Earth) grew up. In fact, if you load up Google Earth on your home computer and simply zoom in ([Page Up] or [+]), you'll land in the Lawrence-based apartment complex where he was raised.

    4. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I landed on this shack. I wonder what the significance of that is?

      http://goo.gl/maps/QONp

    5. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that where Sam and Dean used to live?

    6. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, if you load up Google Earth on your home computer

      Sadly not possible because Google Earth is not available on Linux.

      Thanks, Google. Hope those million Linux servers you have are proving useful.

    7. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging by the low quality, it doesn't look like the buildings were actually modeled, it looks more like they were 3D scanned.

    8. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by B33RM17 · · Score: 1

      Uhhh, that's in Coffeyville dood, wrong corner of the state lol. But mickmel is right, Lawrence, KS is on there because of McClendon. That's also why KU's famous Allen Fieldhouse was one of the first full 3D buildings in Google Earth. Last fall he handed out free Motorola Xoom's to EE, CE, and CS students, me being one of them ;-)

      He's just proud to be a Jayhawk, and so am I! Rock chalk!

      --
      My blood hurts...
    9. Re:Lawrence Kansas? by PenguinOpus · · Score: 1

      Really?

      Google Earth is one of the few things that _is_ supported on Linux at the moment.

  2. All Really Good - its about the Freshness by RapidEye · · Score: 0, Troll

    Meh - at this point, all of them are really good, for me it is who has the freshest data.
    I hate to admit it, but where I live, Bing Maps actually has the newest satellite/overhead views.
      Good Job Dude!

    --
    "Murderer? Well, that's a harsh word. I prefer to think of myself as a Mortality Technician."
    1. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he wasn't modded down?

    2. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rapideye gets pissed he was modded down and then poses as an AC to complain about it.
      Are you involved with any political campaigns by chance?

    3. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by binarylarry · · Score: 0

      Go tell your fat, bald master that the barbarians are at the gate.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    4. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rapideye, at least change your characteristic style with the commas and punctuation if you want to act like someone else.

    5. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is what I don't understand.......go too maps.google.com and go to street view somewhere in the US. Looks ok, some streets look horrible. Now go up to just about anywhere in Canada and do street view. Why is Canada pics so much higher quality? Is a US law blocking HD photos of street view or something or what is up with that?

    6. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by lostfayth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It could simply be that the images for Canada are newer. Google tends to start projects in the US first and then expand them later - and later comes better cameras, faster and denser storage, and so on.

    7. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

      I hate to admit it, but where I live, Bing Maps actually has the newest satellite/overhead views.

      Because Microsoft was last to build its database?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    8. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      It's this. I went on Mapcrunch and jumped around urban CAN/USA random locations. I couldn't find a single shot in Canada that was older than 2009. They all looked great. Most of the USA ones looked just as good, with the exception of those images taken in 2008 or earlier. Those ones were obviously lower quality (especially scenes dated 2007).

    9. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Vintermann · · Score: 2

      Nice try Rapideye.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    10. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by RapidEye · · Score: 0

      You guys are on crack - I made that post last night, then went to bed.
      Go troll elsewhere!

      --
      "Murderer? Well, that's a harsh word. I prefer to think of myself as a Mortality Technician."
    11. Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I posted that comment and honestly have no idea who RapidEye is, but viewing the moderation of this thread just confirms my point: Google shills have taken over slashdot.

  3. Good news for apple users! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Theres now a map!

    Now if you have two hands... And a flashlight. You apple people should be all set!

  4. Do I need a geography lesson that bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many cities does Rome have???

    1. Re:Do I need a geography lesson that bad? by spauldo · · Score: 4, Informative

      It contains itself, as well as Vatacan City, so 2?

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    2. Re:Do I need a geography lesson that bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many cities does Rome have???

      As many as Google says there are.

    3. Re:Do I need a geography lesson that bad? by poticlin · · Score: 1

      I'd like to point out that Vatican is also the smallest independant state. It's a city and a state within a different city and state.

  5. Google trying to save face, except it won't work by mjuarez · · Score: 0, Troll

    This just reeks of desperation, just their way of trying to save face right before Apple kicks them off from the iPhone main screen. It doesn't matter, 99% of users won't even know about this app, they'll just go with Apple's Maps. Even if Google decides somehow magically to introduce turn by turn directions, it still won't matter. Google shot itself in the gut, and they know it. They could have at least kept feature parity with Android, but the fact that iOS Maps app was neglected for years only made Apple react more strongly. Now, Apple controls every main app on iOS (browser, music, maps, messaging). They control their destiny.

  6. Not quite... by ZZeta · · Score: 1

    ...and San Francisco, plus its East Bay and Peninsula neighbors...

    Not to be nitpicky, but I happen to live in Berkeley (clearly east bay neighbor) and after trying the app on my iPhone I can tell you there's no 3D here.

  7. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They control their destiny.

    Apple dictates what apps can and can't be installed on your phone. If you're an iOS user, they control yours.

  8. A city in Rome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which city would that be?

    1. Re:A city in Rome? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Which city would that be?

      Vatican City.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  9. City in Rome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please excuse my ignorance, but I thought Rome *was* a city in Italy... Maybe they mean suburb? Or are Europe's cities so old that they have cities within cities?

    1. Re:City in Rome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its divided up into 19 municipalities, just like many other large cities, and then there is Vatican City

    2. Re:City in Rome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Please excuse my ignorance, but I thought Rome *was* a city in Italy... Maybe they mean suburb? Or are Europe's cities so old that they have cities within cities?"

      Sure, not 2, but 3.

      1. Vecchia Roma (that's the one restaurants are named after)
      2. Roma
      3. Vatican

  10. Fanboy Article? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This article reeks of fanboyism. Why would we think that Google didn't start working on 3D maps until Apple announced it? Why isn't this pointing out that Apple is crapping on their customers by trying to sell them a new phone just to run software that should run just fine on the iPhone 1? And why would they think that Google only now found out about Apple's mapping plans? Apple said they were working on maps when we found out that Apple tracks users. They said that the reason they would continue to track users was to collect data for creating mapping software.

    1. Re:Fanboy Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Speaking of fanboyisn, you just talked about apple tracking users and didn't mention how google is far worse in that regard, even lobbying congress to protect their right to do it.

    2. Re:Fanboy Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was mentioned as a frame of time reference. He said we found out about 3d maps at the same time as tracking

    3. Re:Fanboy Article? by MrDoh! · · Score: 1

      What Android phone did you use in 07?

      --
      Waiting for an amusing sig.
    4. Re:Fanboy Article? by TummyX · · Score: 1

      iOS6 runs (albiet with some missing features) on 3GS which is a 3 year old phone. That's a better upgrade path than what most other mobile phone manufacturers offer.

    5. Re:Fanboy Article? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      iOS6 on a 2G or 3G?!

      Goodness, what are you smoking? It would be unusable! Although, if they were going for the Android user experience maybe it's a great idea!

      DISCLAIMER: THIS IS A JOKE (not even a very good one).

      In short, you have no idea what you're talking about. iOS6 won't run "just fine" on the original iPhone, or even the 3G. The earliest phone it supports is the 3GS, and even then it's going to be missing one or two of the more resource-hungry features.

    6. Re:Fanboy Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lucky for me my HTC G1 runs Jelly Bean.....(in my dreams).

    7. Re:Fanboy Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regular users don't care about updates. Sorry to tell you.

    8. Re:Fanboy Article? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Mapping is not iOS6. Although I will admit that when I read iOS 6, that it processed in my head as iPhone 5. It seems I mistakenly assumed that Apple was pulling another Siri and artificially limiting an application to their newest phone. The article still reads as fanboyism for the other reasons.

    9. Re:Fanboy Article? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Mapping is not iOS6. Although I will admit that when I read iOS 6, that it processed in my head as iPhone 5. It seems I mistakenly assumed that Apple was pulling another Siri and artificially limiting an application to their newest phone. The article still reads as fanboyism for the other reasons...

    10. Re:Fanboy Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe I'm replying to a post so old as this, but how do you think that a 3d maps app would run fine on the original iPhone? I don't feel like checking the numbers, but it's easily less than half the speed and ram of a modern iPhone. The article reeks of fanboyism? You reek of fanboyism when you make presumptions like this. Apple came under heat for features running too slowly in an earlier iOS update and had to roll some of them back. People made the assumption that the company deliberately slowed down those devices to sell new devices. Probably people like you. Now, they withold processor intensive features from older hardware and you accuse them of trying to manipulate the market to sell newer devices. Tell me, how does the company do right by you? Oh wait, they can't.

  11. Great Enhancement to their Ad Platform by dehole · · Score: 1

    Now with 3D Ad's!

    1. Re:Great Enhancement to their Ad Platform by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      And if it's bothering you that much, you can just turn your computer off and whine about it in...wait for it...3D!

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  12. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by ghn · · Score: 0

    You do realize I hope that it is an unfair game? Apple can kick google and its apps out of its fenced garden any time it wants.

    Like the spoiled kid who does not like to loose.

  13. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    umm...Apple wrote and has always controlled the iOS Maps app. They just bought the data from Google.

  14. "Outs" ? Are the maps gay or what ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word most educated English speaking people would use is not "out".

    The word is "introduce".

    Do try to improve your English when you aren't sucking cock, you dickeating
    fucktards.

    1. Re:"Outs" ? Are the maps gay or what ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To "out," meaning to reveal or make known: used since the mid-14th century. In context with homosexuality: used since the 1970's. Improve your own English, you cuntlicking twat: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=out

  15. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You do know that Apple is the author of the IOS maps app? They just use google data. If Apple wanted to make a maps app similar to the one on android that uses vector graphics and so on, they could have, but they didn't. Blame them. Google couldn't have written an improved maps app, because it would have been rejected as being too similar to the IOS app. Google was in a no win situation.

  16. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A spoiled kid that could never make his father happy, was left too much power and now will bully everyone on the playground to try and get what it wants.

  17. oh just admit it by superwiz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Apple will always be a flash in a pan. They'll always come up with a concept and sulk when someone else thinks of how to do it better. It's not because of some anti-birth-right where they can't do it better just because they are "Apple." It's because they think they can do it all. And when you want to do the software, the hardware, the marketing, the sales, you have to get everything to align just right... all the schedules if nothing else. And when you do it and it works, it's great. But it happens much less often than when you have a software company which allows a bunch of hardware vendors to use the software and a bunch of retailers/providers to sell the hardware. If you get to concentrate, you get to develop core strengths. When you want to control the full retail-service-hardware-software stack, you are as weak as the weakest link. And you are guaranteed to eventually lose to those who allow for a few players to duke it out at each level of their stack. This is why they lost to PC. And this is why they lost (fata complete at this point) to Google. This is pretty much like MS developing MS Office for Apple back in the day. They did it mostly because they could.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    1. Re:oh just admit it by Desler · · Score: 1

      Except that many of the Android phone makers are pretty fucking terrible at making decent hardware or even providing decent versions of Android as well without their OEM crapware thrown on top. So that sort of blows your entire point.

    2. Re:oh just admit it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not really, it's just the market settling. In fact, it bolsters his point Macapple forged ahead in the PC line as well, and very soon thereafter they were recognized as over-priced over-hyped trinkets of electronic 'hipness'.

      In '02 we had two camps of artists, one camp that produced using the Mac platform, and the other using a Linux platform. Both groups were tasked with stuff like CD covers, Magazine covers, DVD covers, wireframe modelling, yada yada. The Linux guys were three times as productive as the Mac guys... so the Mac guys were bundled and sold to a competitor...

    3. Re:oh just admit it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By "fata complete" you probably mean "fait accompli".

    4. Re:oh just admit it by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      Uh, no it doesn't. On the contrary, because there are many groups competing to build a decent android phone, and a decent android launcher, and a decent android screen etc, some of them will be pretty fucking terrible. We don't buy from those, we buy from those that succeed. That was precisely the parent's point.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    5. Re:oh just admit it by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

      Your incoherent rant lost me about paragraph two, but I struggled valiantly through to the end where I was rewarded thusly:

      fata complete

      I think you perhaps were reaching for "fait accompli", but you fell short and proved not only that you're a frothing nit, but an illiterate one at that.

    6. Re:oh just admit it by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Exactly how, when, and what did they lose or are losing to Google?

  18. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Nemyst · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As soon as Apple puts its own Maps app up, I wouldn't be surprised to see "duplicate functionality" apps get axed from the store.

    You know, the usual Apple MO.

  19. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 3, Informative

    They could have at least kept feature parity with Android, but the fact that iOS Maps app was neglected for years only made Apple react more strongly.

    As I understand it the iOS Maps app was neglected by Apple, not Google.

    It seems likely that Apple always intended to replace the backend service with their own and one might argue that "neglecting" the app was a good move in that regard. By keeping their users (which includes me) on technology that is probably 5+ years old it gives them a chance of replacing it without users complaining too much about feature regression.

    Google's move hardly "reeks of desperation". Since when has Google done anything other than try and offer the best experience they can on any device?

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  20. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google was able to provide turn-by-turn directions for years (and did for Android). Rumor has it that Apple wouldn't let them release it for iOS even though Google offered to do it for free. Speculation at the time was that Apple didn't want maps to be too good so that when Apple released its own maps later it'd seem like an upgrade. That seems to be exactly how it played out.

  21. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by superwiz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Haven't heard, have you? Samsung doubled the number of units they sold. This is despite injunctions and crap. Apple did not double the number of units they sold and Apple itself reduced estimates for its next quarter (ie, they are not releasing iPhone 5 anytime soon). Laughing at the Apple fanbois is going to be much more fun this time around... there is more of them, but they are just as fanatical and foaming at the mouth as they were 15 years ago. It's over. This time Steve is gone. There is no magic rescue by a cult figure. Last one out, turn off the lights.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  22. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    trying to save face right before Apple kicks them off from the iPhone main screen

    If Microsoft did something like what Apple is doing, they would be rightly RAKED OVER THE COALS and sued till the fucking cows come home, but because this is coming from Apple, the darling of slashdot, the darling of the industry and popular media they get a pass. Fucking sickening.

  23. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt this. There are already many maps apps that duplicate the current maps app. They won't boot waze, garmin, tom-tom apps.

  24. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A fact i am very happy with

  25. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Only problem is the Apple maps program is horrible (as of iOS6 beta 3).
    1. Apple's points of interest database is lacking.
    2. The 3-d functionality is worthless, it's hideous and slow.
    3. No street view.
    4. Turn by turn looks pretty but functionality is horrible. The perspective of the road is to angled and the large "turn sign" covers 30% of screen. You can't see the next turn until you are about 1/10 mile from it. It's like they designed turn-by-turn inside a studio without actually testing it on the road.
    5. They are disabling turn x turn for pre-iPhone 4s

    Unless there are large and quick improvements, there will be many unhappy customers when iOS 6 is released. It will feel like a downgrade. It will improve over time, but they have a lot of catching up to do.

    The biggest positive for iPhone users: google might finally release it's own fully functional iOS map apps.

  26. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did that actually happen, or are you just asserting it?

  27. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A fact i am very happy with

    Because you are happy to leave your security up to someone else?

  28. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sincerely, I've been reading slashdot and blogs indicating how hard it has been for Google to get apps in the iOS ecosystem. Now, they're trying even harder to get a better experience to Apple users, just to hold their user base. But clearly, Apple can ditch them anytime.

    If something, Google could just pull all their apps from the Apple store, and let Apple work their magic. Apple insists they don't need Google, so why would Google wait for them to be dropped.

  29. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Swampash · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Since when has Google done anything other than try and offer the best experience they can on any device?"

    That's a joke, right?

  30. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares?

  31. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

    Yes, shot themselves in the gut. Everyone knows once google loses the war for dominance in 3D maps on iOS, it's only a matter of hours before they have to declare bankrupcy.

    Out of curiosity, you haven't posted since 2008, you come back just to shill/troll for apple?

  32. not gonna cry about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares! They've witheld turn-by-turn navigation from iOS for years, so as far as I am concerned, Apple is right in moving on to something else.

  33. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, you were so happy with Apple not providing you with turn-by-turn navigation? And now with iOS 6, you suddenly are really happy that you get turn-by-turn navigation. Talk about fanbois.
     
    And yes, it was Apple that did not provide you turn-by-turn navigation. Apple licensed Google Maps data, and build their own app to provide Google Maps services, and for some reason did not think navigation was important enough (until now of course).

  34. expectation of a city in Rome by frovingslosh · · Score: 2

    Just how many cities does Google think are in Rome? By my count I have a pretty good guess what the city in Rome might be.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:expectation of a city in Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just how many cities does Google think are in Rome? By my count I have a pretty good guess what the city in Rome might be.

      Vatican City?

    2. Re:expectation of a city in Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Vatican City is inside Rome, so I guess there are 2 to choose from.

    3. Re:expectation of a city in Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may need a geography check.... Rome and Vatican City.... That makes 2 in /my/ count.

    4. Re:expectation of a city in Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That error in phrasing was written by whomever did the summary. Google's blog post phrases it correctly.

      The growing list of 3D cities include Boulder, Boston, Charlotte, Lawrence (Kan.), Long Beach (Ca.), Los Angeles, Portland (Ore.), San Diego, Santa Cruz, Tampa, Tucson, and the San Francisco Bay Area (including the Peninsula and East Bay) as well as Rome, Italy.

  35. Not on iPhone 4? by Frogking · · Score: 2

    I guess now I have a reason to buy a newer iPhone if this only works on the 4S and not the 4 I have. Thanks, Google!

    1. Re:Not on iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 3GS still works and will receive iOS6. So as there is no 3D support for my region, I see no interest in changing my phone (except battery which becomes weak).

      Though who knows, if iPhone 5 is realy cool I may change my mind....for now, I stick with my 3GS.

    2. Re:Not on iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy a phone that you can upgrade yourself and stop letting Apple tell you what you can and cannot do.

  36. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's a joke, right?

    No, Google just care about eyeballs and will work to get them.
    They will write Exchange plugins to work with Gmail.
    They will buy Exchange related technology to get Gmail to work 'properly' with iOS mail.
    They will do what it takes to get a user, whatever platform the user may be on (for reasonably popular platforms of course).

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  37. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Informative

    If Apple wanted to make a maps app similar to the one on android that uses vector graphics and so on, they could have, but they didn't.

    In Apple's defense, from Google Maps' Terms of Use:

    2. Restrictions on Use. Unless you have received prior written authorization from Google (or, as applicable, from the provider of particular Content), you must not: [...]
    (f) use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device

    So the question is, did Apple try to get prior written authorization and Google declined their request? Or did they just say, "We'll get our map data from somewhere else because we don't like Google anymore."

    In Google's defense, they license some of their data from elsewhere and they may be restricted as to what they can allow others to do. For example, looking at Japan, down in the lower right of the screen we see "Map Data © 2012 Google, ZENRIN" Zenrin is a company that Google uses, I assume, for some Japanese map data. They can use the data for their purposes, but they cannot sublicense that data for other purposes. If Apple wanted to use that data the same way as Google via Google's Maps API, they'd have to also license the data from Zenrin.

    A quick jaunt around the world will show you that Google has licensed map data from lots of different companies: GeoBasis, TeleAtlas, AfriGIS, MapLink, Mapcity, Inav/Geosistemas, INEGI, and I'm sure some others I have missed. Apple could run around and try to sign similar licenses with all those companies to use Google's map data, or they could just find someone else.

  38. Apple needs more time. by formfeed · · Score: 1

    3d representations for whole cities -- ever thought how many corners there are that need to be rounded?

    Of course Apple needs more time. But in the end, your city will look much better.

  39. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    And yes, it was Apple that did not provide you turn-by-turn navigation.

    Google did not allow Apple's maps to include turn-by-turn navigation, their license forbade it.

    That's fair enough — Google dictates the terms of use for their data. But Apple had to build their own system to get around this restriction (or license from elsewhere).

  40. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple tried to extend iOS Maps functionality to include turn-by-turn, but were not able to agree on licensing terms with Google. I believe Google preferred to retain that feature as a competitive advantage in Android (and that's entirely fair — Google *do* own the data). This is documented in a recent WSJ article discussing the Apple/Google Maps deal.

  41. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by rockout · · Score: 0, Troll

    Loose?? Seriously??

    --
    I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
  42. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

    Apple itself reduced estimates for its next quarter (ie, they are not releasing iPhone 5 anytime soon)

    (Whiny Fanboi Voice) Yeah, but, but, when Apple releases the iPhone 5, they'll bury Samsung! And if they don't, it'll only be because they just can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand! You'll see!

  43. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, because he very stupid.

  44. Kansas? by PPH · · Score: 1

    Isn't Kansas flat?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Kansas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't Kansas flat?

      Oddly, no it isn't. There are no mountains but there are plenty of large rolling hills which you definitely wouldn't call flat. There are plenty of other states which are far more flat than Kansas.

    2. Re:Kansas? by B33RM17 · · Score: 1

      Just drive between KC and Wichita, acres upon acres of rolling hills. I-35 goes right through the Flint Hills, they're damn beautiful. It rarely stays flat across the state. I love living here, the open prairie really is gorgeous. Great fishing too :-D

      --
      My blood hurts...
    3. Re:Kansas? by CompMD · · Score: 1

      Lawrence has some very hilly areas. Its really pretty to take off from Lawrence airport, head east, then south, then west along 15th Street . There's some lovely rolling hills.

      Kansas in general is surprisingly hilly. As another poster said, the Flint Hills are spectacular. Even in eastern Kansas and KC itself you'll see a lot of hills. There's even cave systems excavated in the hills for business and storage.

    4. Re:Kansas? by spauldo · · Score: 1

      Depends how you define flat.

      Yeah, it's flat for non-desert land. That means some minor hills. If you've ever been to Iowa, imagine that with the hills about 1/3rd as high. That's why most people call it flat. It is more hilly than the Texas panhandle, but geometric planes have more hills than the Texas panhandle.

      It's not flat compared to, say, the ocean on a calm day. That's why most Kansans insist it's not flat.

      Oh, and the Flint Hills? Yeah, it's a ridge of hills that runs through the state. You'd barely notice them if there weren't signs pointing out that they're there.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  45. Curious by inexia · · Score: 0

    Will it offer a flight simulation mode? Traffic jams be damned!

  46. At least he is getting some security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With Android, your only choise is to download a ROM built from a questionable website maintained by hackers. An image built with vanilla quality drivers and ZERO security.

    1. Re:At least he is getting some security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And as we know kids, no security is MAX FREEDOM!

      WANG OUT TIME!

  47. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

    I believe Google preferred to retain that feature as a competitive advantage [...]

    It fits in nicely with the whole "Google versus Apple" battle, but I don't see it. Why would Google not want iOS to use Google maps? They want everybody to use Google maps. I can't believe that Google would do that.

    That said, I could certainly believe that Google went around and tried to renegotiate and basically got told, "Yeah, sure, for (giant sum of money)," which they then tried to pass on to Apple. Apple said, "We can find someone to do it cheaper--your loss."

  48. The new iPad.... by MatthiasF · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..is the iPad 3.

    SAY IT! I WANT TO HEAR YOU SAY IT!

    No more of this "the new" crap.

    1. Re:The new iPad.... by B33RM17 · · Score: 1

      Lmao, I'd mod this up in a heartbeat if I could

      --
      My blood hurts...
    2. Re:The new iPad.... by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      ..is the iPad 3.

      SAY IT! I WANT TO HEAR YOU SAY IT!

      No more of this "the new" crap.

      Officially it is "iPad (3rd Generation)" in technical specs, but for marketing reasons it's The New iPad until they release a newer one.

  49. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by PNutts · · Score: 1

    Apple dictates what apps can and can't be installed on your phone, but they don't control it. Jailbreak to install whatever you want and they've never removed an installed app from a device. They do control what's in the App Store but that isn't part of the discussion.

  50. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You've reviewed every line of code in the OS and the apps you run?

  51. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by PNutts · · Score: 1

    When I was young I didn't like too loose. Now I take what I can get.

  52. Sergei will come to the rescue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First Google will produce the 3D map app, then sue the living shit out of Apple for just THINKING about a 3D map app. Force Apple to take their own app of their app store, then take their own map app of the app store leaving every Apple user with no choice but to purchase a white Tom-Tom which you can only use if you hold it right. Then Sergei will parachute into Infinity Drive after spending 3 weeks eating nothing but bean burritos for breakfast, lunch and dinner and take a massive steamy shit in the foyer.

    Fuck you Apple, fuck you Apple users.

    While writing this I came up with a great business idea. Get a car and mount a giant hand on top flipping the bird. People pay you to drive and park the car in front of their enemies house for 24 hours.

  53. Thermonuclear by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    How's that thermonuclear thing working out for you now, Steve?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Thermonuclear by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Judging by how lawsuits go so far, pretty good, actually.

    2. Re:Thermonuclear by Tough+Love · · Score: 0

      So... according to you, it matter's not if Samsung's phone profits go crazy while Apple's wilt, as long as the lawsuits just keep chugging along?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Thermonuclear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You really are an anti apple twat. There profits were up over 20% year on year. Is that wilting? No of course not, only if your a rabid anti apple twat who can't think objectively

    4. Re:Thermonuclear by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I don't see Apple's profits wilting. By it's inconsequential, really, since going thermonuclear implies bringing down the other guy no matter what. It tends to be bad for everyone's business. The trick is to survive longest.

      whether Apple can do it, we shall see. I wish them to fail, but so far they are having the upper hand in the fight.

    5. Re:Thermonuclear by bursch-X · · Score: 1

      Well if going thermonuclear is about who's surviving longest, Steve has apparently lost ;-)

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    6. Re:Thermonuclear by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Apple's profits have wilted? In what universe?

      Either way, thermonuclear destruction "at all costs" (according to Steve's original vent) doesn't require that you're profitable, just that the other guy is gone.

      Apple didn't hit the expectations that the analysts were guessing at in this quarter, but that doesn't mean they're wilting - sales are up, and strong in all segments except for the much-aged iPod. Their PC business is growing in a stagnant industry overall (and their new retina MBP still has a two week waiting list), they are selling iPhones and iPads almost as fast as they can make them.

      I'm not sure what definition of "wilting" you're using?

    7. Re:Thermonuclear by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Gotta earn that pay, right bonch?

      Yawn. Try a new trolling method kid. Not bonch, never been bonch, never been paid to post on slashdot. You also forgot to log in. Maybe you left your slashdot password with all that evidence you also forgot to present.

  54. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surprised by the spelling "loose"? You must be new here. :)

  55. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    just their way of trying to save face right before Apple kicks them off from the iPhone main screen

    I can see it now: instead of "Android is better because it has Flash" it will be "Android is better because it has Google".

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  56. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    A fact i am very happy with...

    ...because I'm so glad I'm a Beta

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  57. Recursive city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a city in Rome?

    1. Re:Recursive city by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      a city in Rome?

      Yes, The Vatican.

  58. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    As soon as Apple puts its own Maps app up, I wouldn't be surprised to see "duplicate functionality" apps get axed from the store.

    You know, the usual Apple MO.

    Wasn't that basically the Microsoft MO, except instead of banning competitors they would cut of their air supply and bankrupt them?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  59. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Apple itself reduced estimates for its next quarter (ie, they are not releasing iPhone 5 anytime soon)

    (Whiny Fanboi Voice) Yeah, but, but, when Apple releases the iPhone 5, they'll bury Samsung! And if they don't, it'll only be because they just can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand! You'll see!

    Well for me, the iPhone 5 roll out is the mostly breathlessly anticipated Apple offering ever, because I'm looking forward to the epic fail. And Apple spinmods, before you reach for that button, know that I do not hate Apple. Per se. I hate evil.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  60. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

    Apple insists they don't need Google, so why would Google wait for them to be dropped.

    If Google pulls their iPhone apps it could result in an antitrust action against Google. This way, any antitrust action would be against Apple.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  61. Devil's Advocate by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't the current state of Google's 3D work be about right for someone who started working out it about the same time Apple acquired C3?

    Frankly I don't know why there is this level of fuss about 3D maps. The 3D maps are cool, but they are a nice add-on but traditional maps serve people far better day to day... for Apple they are more vital as they make for a somewhat viable replacement for Street View. But Google already has street view (and now that Street View backpack to go where many have gone before, but Googlgize it). So the 3D mapping is really more extraneous for Google.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google has work to do even in a major metro area like Atlanta. Their maps are constantly misplacing addresses and StreetView often looks like someone smeared Vaseline on the lenses while driving around in the middle of a storm. They're AWFUL. I get far better help from the satellite images and if I want directions, I double check with Bing if I can't see my destination in the crummy StreetView.

    2. Re:Devil's Advocate by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      It's hard to say, but making the claim that Google rushed their product to market as a direct response to Apples recent announcement is simply making things up and declaring Apple the 'innovator' because the poster had not facts to the contrary.

      I agree that 3D maps are over hyped.

  62. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Nope, Apple could not get terms they wanted for things like vector maps, or more importantly to allow turn by turn directions.

    Now that Apple is free of the Google Mapping Data Tyrant, any app that wishes can create and display turn-by-turn directions - and in fact there's a specific mapping app store that encourages this.

    Google is not nearly so free on Android. They want you using Google Maps always.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  63. Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    Apple was trying to work out a deal with Google that would allow turn-by-turn directions atop Google Map Data, but Google wanted a pile of money or some other terms Apple could not bear.

    Instead they are using map data from a more open source than Google. You Android people talk about Google being so open, but just try to get a pinch of the data the Google Dwarfs keeps locked in the mountain hall.

    The very proof of this is the fact that the very moment they do not have to rely on Google for map data they provide turn by turn directions and let other applications do so as well. You have no proof Apple could have provided turn by turn directions at any time, and in fact the Google license Apple was publicly under explicitly forbade it.

    Meanwhile Apple is now running on OpenStreetMap data (combined with other sources).

    Like your freedom? You'd be wise to choose Apple...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      Actually there was power play between Google and Apple. Google ultimately wanted Apple to allow their own app, which Apple did not want too. And Apple wanted Google to license everything they had on Google Maps, which they refused and agreed only to give a taste of Google Maps.
       
      Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.
       
      And about OSM, I could give a shit about who uses OSM, unless they contribute to it. I dont see Apple contribute to OSM so far, so I dont give shit that Apple uses OSM. May be slightly disgusted, but nothing more.

    2. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple was trying to work out a deal with Google that would allow turn-by-turn directions atop Google Map Data, but Google wanted a pile of money or some other terms Apple could not bear.

      Oh you make it sound so one sided. Apple wants their own map ecosystem because they know there's money to be made, plain and simple. Google wanted a little more recognition on their data (probably a logo or splash or something), and for Apple to tie in Google's Latitude service (optional location aware crap) to their nav app. Because there's money to be made. Apple refused because it's their walled garden.

      Instead they are using map data from a more open source than Google.

      Yes, because pictures of the world are SO proprietary. It's not like any jackass can walk somewhere with a camera and take their own picture or something...

      You Android people talk about Google being so open, but just try to get a pinch of the data the Google Dwarfs keeps locked in the mountain hall.

      And Apple will just hand you everything they know about you on a silver platter? I've never seen it.

      The very proof of this is the fact that the very moment they do not have to rely on Google for map data they provide turn by turn directions and let other applications do so as well.

      The very moment... they've been building a portfolio of map companies for years. Also, Google isn't the only source of turn by turn navigation on Android - you can download other apps if you like.

      You have no proof Apple could have provided turn by turn directions at any time, and in fact the Google license Apple was publicly under explicitly forbade it.

      It's Google's data. Apple could have licensed it. They didn't like the terms. How is this a crime?

      Like your freedom? You'd be wise to choose Apple...

      You might want to check the Oxygen levels in that little walled garden of yours. Either it's dropping dangerously low, or Apple fanboys really are getting dumber every year.

    3. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

      Google wanted a little more recognition on their data (probably a logo or splash or something)

      Google already had a mandatory logo that you could not hide (or the app would be rejected).

      They wanted it even larger....

      Apple wants their own map ecosystem because they know there's money to be made, plain and simple.

      What is simple is that restrictions on map use by developers sucked, I know because I am a developer working on a number of iOS mapping applications that were impossible under the old licenses.

      That is the primary motivator, that Apple could not be held hostage by Google over map features that developers could use freely on Android.

      Do you have ANY inkling how expensive it is to maintain a full scale mapping application, with traffic data and directions? And you still maintain that Apple would MAKE money off having to incur this expense?

      Mapping is a huge cost sink, but for phones it is a base feature you simply cannot leave out.

      Yes, because pictures of the world are SO proprietary.

      I'm talking about road pathing data, which *IS* quite proprietary. There are a LOT of updates to road data that Google collects and stores and does not share generally - updates that OSM gets and does share with everyone. I would rather all road updates be dumped into OSM where Waze and other great Free apps could get them, wouldn't you?

      And Apple will just hand you everything they know about you on a silver platter?

      Apple doesn't have to, because they are using other sources you can also get data from. They are not acting as the master store, except for 3D data (which Google isn't letting you access in an app either BTW).

      they've been building a portfolio of map companies for years

      But there was no access to data or technologies from those companies until iOS 6.

      The moment users were presented with non-Google data, the fact is App developers were more free. There was already a hint of that when strict reverse geocoding limitations were lifted around a year ago after Apple stopped using Google for reverse geocoding. In every case, when Apple stopped using Google as a data source developers had more freedom.

      It's Google's data. Apple could have licensed it.

      You can always set a price dear enough for something that in PRACTICAL terms it cannot be licensed. That is what Google chose to do instead of working with Apple on reasonable terms and doing something best for the users.

      Regardless of terms though the fact Apple had to ever think about terms is why they wanted to move away from Google, so there was no worry that in the future terms might get even worse.

      You might want to check the Oxygen levels in that little walled garden of yours.

      You may want to clean off your glasses since you cannot see plain reality right in front of you, and you also don't seem very familiar with mapping data.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.

      Why do you think Apple sacrificed usability? The fact is they did not switch to their own mapping data until they could offer something more usable.

      Not agreeing to terms that would make the maps worse for users (like larger and more prominent logos that EVERY app developer has to rev an app to make sure they are not hiding) is not "sacrificing usability".

      I dont see Apple contribute to OSM so far

      Why would they not want the data they are presenting to be more accurate? If Apple is using that data they will help improve it.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.

      Why do you think Apple sacrificed usability? The fact is they did not switch to their own mapping data until they could offer something more usable.

      Not agreeing to terms that would make the maps worse for users (like larger and more prominent logos that EVERY app developer has to rev an app to make sure they are not hiding) is not "sacrificing usability".

      I guess it depends on whether you find navigation useful. If you did, then apple did sacrifice usability. If you did not, neither Apple nor Google did anything that affects you. So neither is evil.

      I dont see Apple contribute to OSM so far

      Why would they not want the data they are presenting to be more accurate? If Apple is using that data they will help improve it.

      How should I know? Why are they not contributing to OSM again?

    6. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by mea_culpa · · Score: 1

      You can always set a price dear enough for something that in PRACTICAL terms it cannot be licensed. That is what Google chose to do instead of working with Apple on reasonable terms and doing something best for the users.

      Regardless of terms though the fact Apple had to ever think about terms is why they wanted to move away from Google, so there was no worry that in the future terms might get even worse.

      This is when Google stopped being Google IMO.

    7. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Oh you make it sound so one sided. Apple wants their own map ecosystem because they know there's money to be made, plain and simple. Google wanted a little more recognition on their data (probably a logo or splash or something), and for Apple to tie in Google's Latitude service (optional location aware crap) to their nav app. Because there's money to be made. Apple refused because it's their walled garden.

      Can you prove this? So far we've been dealing with facts -- ypu are presenting the thread with speculation, so please follow up with evidence.

    8. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      How the fuck would you know whether Apple is contributing to OSM? And what exactly would they contribute? The address and coordinates for Apple HQ? Apple isn't a mapping company.

      And no company in the world is "evil" for not giving you some feature in an app or any other product. To even bring up the idea shows you're a pretentious twit. I hope your turn-by-turn directions lead you off a nice cliff.

    9. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Er, because it would widely publicized. Apple has good PR personnel who usually make sure it is widely publicized that Apple is contributing to OSM. The simplest is to throw money at them, to help them run servers. They could also share their routing algorithm, and the code that uses OSM maps.
       
      Well if they are trying to push Android and cripple iPhone, to me, they are evil.

    10. Re:Wrong, Google forbade turn-by-turn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is a worthless company with shit products for tech unsavvy retards. If you like them, you are automatically a fucking moron.

  64. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

    Google has been dragging their feet at adding iOS apps for their own services. For example, there's still no iOS GTalk app, not even with chat - forget about voice/video. GMail app took, what, five years? and it's still pretty crappy at that. Google+ app still had no iPad version last I checked.

    So, no. They don't seem to be all that eager to have their services run on iOS, at least as apps. I guess that's because they prefer you to use their web apps when possible, but they are decidedly second-rate citizens on iOS, so in practice we have what we have.

  65. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nope, Google wanted greater ownership of the app and Apple didn't want to rely on a competitor. As another poster mentioned, making a maps app was prohibited by the AppStore TOS until recently.

  66. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

    Please define evil. By my standard, you must not be in love with Google either.

  67. I think Tim Cook is in a very difficult position. by sousoux · · Score: 0

    I believe Apple has hit the peak of possible margins with their current model and risks the same issues they faced in PCs against Microsoft. They either need a very hot new category that can drag the phones along with it of they need to radically change their model. It's unlikely they will achieve the former unless they are exceptionally lucky and it is very difficult for Tim Cook to abandon Job's path and do the latter.

  68. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by MachDelta · · Score: 2

    "[Google] is believed to have angered Apple leaders by withholding the Street View and turn-by-turn navigation features. Its demands were for better branding within the app and incorporation of its Latitude service, which Apple was unwilling to integrate." (WSJ)

    Sounds like Apple wanted to just buy the data and do their own thing with it. Google wanted an inside track. Apple refused. Doesn't really sound like either company was doing anything other than what would serve them best.

  69. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Did Google kick in the door of a journalist yet? Did Google "suicide" a factory worker who lost a phone prototype? Did Google try to strongarm an environmental organization? Did Larry park in the disabled spot?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  70. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

    You did good in listing Apple's evil actions as reported by the press. Now can you do the same for Google?

  71. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Dupple · · Score: 1

    Google aren't saints you know

    Sky Hook

    Net neutrality - Verizon

    By passing user privacy settings in Safari and IE

    $500 million fine for illegal prescription drug imports ads

    and many more

    --
    Watch those corners
  72. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by B33RM17 · · Score: 1

    Lol, I allllllllmost didn't catch the sarcasm in that. It's late, in need to get to bed...

    --
    My blood hurts...
  73. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Vintermann · · Score: 1

    No one ever got antitrust action against them for withdrawing one of their own services. If so, I guess Apple would be in trouble for not making an iTunes app for Android, and Microsoft would be in trouble for not porting Word to Linux.

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  74. This is exactly what we wanted all along. by David_The_Expert · · Score: 1

    This is EXACTLY what we wanted all along. More competition == better products. As an iOS user, I was excited to hear that Apple was ditching the Google Maps API because the current maps app is so terrible. Anything would be better. So now we'll have a much improved Apple maps app, and a vastly improved separate Google maps app. Win win win!

  75. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

    I am happy to leave my security up to someone else. I have better things to do and my phone has a almost direct line to my bank account so it needs to be secure.
    Life is really to short to have to spend hours keeping tabs on whats what in the latest phone security.

    I also let antivirus companies handle my security on my computer.

  76. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 0

    Thank you ignorant anti-apple fanbois.
    Don't let fact hit you in the ass on your way out.

  77. And before anyone starts by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Funny

    London also has 2: the City of London and the City of Westminster. Budapest consists of Buda and Pest. And of course there's Ankh-Morpork. It would appear that binary cities are as relatively frequent as binary stars, perhaps because, like stars, they grow by accretion.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:And before anyone starts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up for Pratchett reference!

    2. Re:And before anyone starts by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      London also has 2: the City of London and the City of Westminster.

      Wouldn't there be 3: Greater London, the City of London (the Square Mile), and the City of Westminster?

    3. Re:And before anyone starts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Greater London is not actually anything more than a 'county' effectively.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London

    4. Re:And before anyone starts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      London also has 2: the City of London and the City of Westminster.

      [snip] And of course there's Ankh-Morpork.

      Wouldn't there be 3: Greater London, the City of London (the Square Mile), and the City of Westminster?

      Also 3 for Ankh-Morpork! Ankh, Morpork and the river in between (which has its own life forms). Oh BUGGRIT, make that 4 - Foul Ole Ron counts as well, but I don't want to think about his inhabitants.

  78. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by adolf · · Score: 1

    IANAL, but: Neither Apple nor Google are monopolies in any related market, so they have no monopoly power to abuse. They're both a long way from the long arm of anti-trust laws, at least with mapping...

  79. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

    Care to share the facts, so that I can dodge them on the way out?

  80. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by samkass · · Score: 1

    Wow, you were so happy with Apple not providing you with turn-by-turn navigation? And now with iOS 6, you suddenly are really happy that you get turn-by-turn navigation.

    I used the free Waze app on iOS before. I have the iOS 6 beta on my dev phone and it's better in some ways but not as good as Waze in others. Waze was nice in that you could log on to their map editor and fix the roads around your neighborhood. They were, however, not very good at actual directions to obscure places, and unless you did sign onto their site your neighborhood's streets were probably a mess in their DB. I'm sure Apple will not only do better, but contribute back like they tend to do to all the open source data and code projects they affiliate with.

    --
    E pluribus unum
  81. good post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    my co-worker's step-mother makes $69/hr on the computer. She has been out of work for 6 months but last month her income was $17799 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this site http://snurl.com/24g56wd

  82. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by mea_culpa · · Score: 1

    Between all of the locked bootloaders, lackluster Nexi offering, buggy outdated software, draconian carrier restrictions, etc. The love is gone.
    Android was fun from the G1 up until the Driod X with eFuse. From that point forward it has become apparent that Android and every major player behind it is trying its best to be like Apple, but not in the way that matters.
    It is sad really. I love Android and the idea of it, but it is being savagely raped by those that created it and profess love for it, much the same way George Lucas raped Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
    For me, I'm most likely going to buy the iPhone 5, mainly as I know what I'm getting, a solid stable smartphone with the added bonus of a middle finger pointed firmly to Google, Motorola, Samsung, HTC and Verizon. Verizon in the form of the middle finger already given to them by Apple.
    Doesn't mean I like Apple, but that I have come to the conclusion that they are the only ones still capable of twisting the arms of the true evil here, the carriers.

  83. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Google was able to provide turn-by-turn directions for years (and did for Android). Rumor has it that Apple wouldn't let them release it for iOS even though Google offered to do it for free. Speculation at the time was that Apple didn't want maps to be too good so that when Apple released its own maps later it'd seem like an upgrade. That seems to be exactly how it played out.

    Cool story bro.

    How did this get +2 interesting?

    It's well known via many publicly accessible sources that Google's terms didn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (or any other third party app service) without prior consent of Google.

    By "rumour has it" you really mean "my predetermined bias towards Google and against Apple means that I'll just make a wild assed guess that paints Google as a the good guy" right?

    In reality, Apple negotiated for the right to include turn-by-turn, but they couldn't agree to Google's terms. At no point ever was Google offering it "for free". You also don't seem to understand that the Google maps app on iOS is actually written by Apple. Why would Apple "[not] allow them to release it" on iOS when Apple themselves write the app and just licence access to the maps API from Google?

  84. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Did Google kick in the door of a journalist yet? Did Google "suicide" a factory worker who lost a phone prototype? Did Google try to strongarm an environmental organization? Did Larry park in the disabled spot?

    Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.

    Did Apple deliberately go against user settings to set third party advertising and tracking cookies on computers by exploiting a browser bug?

    And you're seriously blaming Apple for the alleged murder of a third party factory employee (I assume that's what you're implying - that Apple paid to have a worker killed, or had someone in-house go and do it) due to a lost prototype? What reality do you live in?

    I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed the police department responsible for investigating a criminal act involving Gizmodo and the purchase of stolen property. Good to know. How are they managing to keep it funded and yet still remain enormously profitable?

    Wait, are you saying that Gizmodo's door *shouldn't* have been "kicked in" (in reality, they knocked) to investigate a crime? In your world it's fine for the police to ignore the report of a crime and very public evidence posted by the suspects themselves? Not sure how this is "evil"? Maybe you can fill me in?

    And parking in a disabled spot when it's not needed is very annoying. It's as bad as people who park on double yellows or in a fire lane.

  85. Please Google Earth devs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Won't you take me to Funkytown?

  86. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Deorus · · Score: 1

    Certainly, because they never did the Xbox, which is even more closed and controlled, right?

  87. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by puto · · Score: 0

    Apple dictates what apps can and can't be installed on your phone, but they don't control it. Jailbreak to install whatever you want and they've never removed an installed app from a device. They do control what's in the App Store but that isn't part of the discussion.

    They might not have removed it but they disabled Siri's server connections for iphone 4 users who had already downloaded so it no longer functioned. So stopping an installed app from functioning, is just the same as removing it.

    --
    The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  88. On Desktop OS yet? by Tomji · · Score: 1

    I tried Google Earth for Windows but I don't see the 3D maps on it yet. It seems Google really hates PC's now, they just abandoned iGoogle too. My main device will always be a PC or PC like device (Mouse/Keyboard), not some silly touch device.

  89. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Deorus · · Score: 1

    Alienating iOS users is not in Google's best interest. iOS is more profitable to Google than Android, and thats before development costs are even considered. Most mobile search requests are served to iOS users, iOS is the mobile platform with the highest CPM, Safari is the most popular mobile browser, iOS users are all guaranteed to be using high-end products and thus have money to spend, and even if none of the previously mentioned facts were true, it would be stupid for an advertisement company to alienate a portion of its potential userbase by not providing proper support for their platform of choice.

  90. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure what your point is. I've had turn-by-turn navigation on my iDevices for quite a while now, with the NavFree app. That's how iStuff works...you download apps to extend the functionality.

    Troll harder, tard.

  91. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    How recently? The Waze app has been available for ages, and it doesn't even use Google's maps.

  92. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Dog-Cow · · Score: 0

    You are ignorant of the subject at hand. Google has almost completely ignored iOS. There is a Google Voice app, which is not a Universal app. It is OK, but nothing to write home about. There are no apps for any other Google service that is worth mentioning. Most services have no app at all.

    And Google didn't do anything to get iOS working with gmail. That effort came from Apple.

    (It would take approximately 5 minutes to convert GV to a Universal app and submit it to the store. The fact that they haven't bothered demonstrates that Google doesn't give a shit about Apple's customers.)

  93. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, you were so happy with Apple not providing you with turn-by-turn navigation? And now with iOS 6, you suddenly are really happy that you get turn-by-turn navigation. Talk about fanbois.

    Who cares, smartypantts.

    Really.

  94. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

    You may want to look into how long it took for Apple to approve the Google Voice app.

  95. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only do you give no examples of "the usual Apple MO," you're flat-out wrong about this one as they've not only stated they LIKE third party navigation apps, iOS 6 even adds a way for said apps to integrate themselves with the new mapping framework: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/06/13/apple_hands_off_transit_directions_to_third_party_apps_in_ios_6_maps.html

  96. Re:POWER TITS! by ai4px · · Score: 1

    Sounds to me like /.'s capcha has been compromised.... I've seen several spams for rolex watches and now this one too...

  97. But my house is weirdly distorted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not in real life but in Google Earth. It looks like a surrealist painting. Not really recognizable as my house.

  98. Brief review by sootman · · Score: 1

    I finally had time to load it up and check it out on my phone this morning. Initial findings:
    1) It is pretty freaking amazing.
    2) The gestures for navigation are perfect.
    3) It is awesome and makes me want a tablet.
    4) I hope they figure out a way to make trees not look like round-topped posts.
    5) Lucky for me, I'm happy to look at SF all day. They did a good job on the sunken plaza at the Powell Street BART station, but I wish they would have been able to perfectly render the sculpture at Justin Herman Plaza (which, ironically, is made up of rectangular prisms.)
    But I'm just picky. GREAT JOB GUYS!

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  99. i said so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    test test listen up.

  100. recursive problems by schlachter · · Score: 1

    it's it problematic to define a city as containing itself? It's Rome...all the way down.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  101. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

    Don't believe everything you read.

    "[Google] is believed to have angered Apple leaders by withholding the Street View [...]"

    My iPhone 4S supports Street View in the default Maps application. Sounds like the only person who "believed" it was the writer.

    Like I said, it makes a good story. Corporate intrigue, behemoths jockeying for position, etc. The truth is usually far more boring.

  102. 'A city in Rome'? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    Vatican City? I don't think that is what was intended.

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
    1. Re:'A city in Rome'? by tinet · · Score: 1

      Wow, Rome travel ok! Or Thailand Travel. I love 3D maps Thailand city

  103. Google Maps on iPad still behind by nicolaiplum · · Score: 1

    Yet Google Maps on iPad doesn't even have a distance measure, nor support offline map fragments (even as uselessly as Android). It also doesn't look vector-based yet, it's still tile-based. Google really have some catching up to do, and shouldn't be focusing just on minority new features for Google Earth.

    --
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
  104. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Heretic2 · · Score: 1

    I thought Google used Navteq data, like most of the players in the industry. Ie the map data that still shows the new Tollways where I live a good 100 meters to the left, and warns me about drowning in the pond I'm "driving through."

  105. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Heretic2 · · Score: 1

    Some kids just like to tight.

  106. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by superwiz · · Score: 1

    You did good in listing Apple's evil actions as reported by the press. Now can you do the same for Google?

    That's an attempt at false equivalence.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  107. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.

    I am pretty certain those were examples. You can dismiss any example (used to establish a pattern) by claiming that particular example is used as too odd a criterion. Of course, when you do that, you can't claim objectivity.

    I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed the police department responsible for investigating a criminal act involving Gizmodo and the purchase of stolen property. Good to know. How are they managing to keep it funded and yet still remain enormously profitable?

    Even you yourself don't believe this argument.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  108. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.

    I am pretty certain those were examples. You can dismiss any example (used to establish a pattern) by claiming that particular example is used as too odd a criterion. Of course, when you do that, you can't claim objectivity.

    I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed the police department responsible for investigating a criminal act involving Gizmodo and the purchase of stolen property. Good to know. How are they managing to keep it funded and yet still remain enormously profitable?

    Even you yourself don't believe this argument.

    No, I clearly don't because it's not an argument; it's hyperbole in response to the GP's hyperbole that Apple are "evil" for "kicking down the door of a journalist". Unless Apple are direct employers of the police department that went to investigate that offence then Apple did no such thing. It reported the theft/loss of property like any other company and the police in the appropriate jurisdiction carried out their job and investigated the crime. It was pretty easy for them, given that Gizmodo didn't exactly hide what they'd done.

    Either way Apple didn't "kick down the door of a journalist", so claiming they are evil because of doing so is a total non-starter.

  109. Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    You are ignorant of the subject at hand. Google has almost completely ignored iOS

    On my iPhone I have the "Google" app, Google Authenticator, Google Translate and Chrome. I could also have a Google+ app, a GMail app, Google Earth, Google Latitude and Google Books. (I personally can't get Google Voice because it isn't available in the Australian iTunes store).

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park