Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple Replaced iOS Maps
tlhIngan writes "So why did Apple decide to ditch the (working) iOS maps app with one based on their own data (despite having one more year to the contract)? It turns out to be turn-by-turn voice navigation. It wasn't a feature in the original Apple-Google licensing agreement, so Apple went back to Google to renegotiate what has become a top-tier feature on Android. Apple wanted it. In return, Google wanted increased branding in the maps app (Apple refused) or to integrate Latitude (Google's FourSquare competitor), to which Apple refused as well. As a result Apple was forced to seek other sources in order to obtain this feature." Eventually, iOS users who don't want to wait for Apple-Google parity will be able to download a native version of Google's maps (rather than a hacked version), but that could be a ways off.
This is probably the most accurate, and intelligent read on the topic. His sources are very close to Apple; VERY close indeed. http://daringfireball.net/2012/09/timing_of_apples_map_switch You'll notice that he says it was all about timing, and how much time was left on the clock.
Help me, help you. - Jerry McGuire
While in the short term, I think its a huge loss for Apple. I think it is good for consumers because it may create some competition in this space. There are no real competitors for Google Maps. Apple has a ton of cash and if they can get it done right, it may create a competitor in the space and spur innovation as they fight for market share.
You'd think Google could've gotten Apple to agree to patent detente in exchange for full map support with turn-by-turn and the works. Whether branded or not, Google would still get the search terms to use to improve their systems. I wonder whether this was even discussed. Then again, maybe both sides were so concerned about branding that they lost track of the bigger picture.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Google wanted increased branding in the maps app (Apple refused) or to integrate Lattitude (Google's FourSquare competitor), to which Apple refused as well. As a result Apple decided to seek other sources in order to obtain this feature.
FTFY.
You don't help your enemy when he's digging his own hole. I'm sure Google is loving this, and is in no rush to release their Maps app.
First of all, start out by trying to use the new map. In your area it may be fine; it has been for me so far. It seems like Europe and other areas the data may be more wonky at the moment.
But if you really find you cannot use Apple maps, there are other alternatives:
1) Just use maps.google.com in a browser, you can also save the direct link to your home screen.
2) Use the Bing app which includes Bing maps.
3) Use an app based on Open Street Maps which generally have good maps in highly populated areas - Waze is free and also does crowdsourced traffic/hazard/police reports.
4) Use any of the offline mapping solutions like Navigon.
5) The Yelp app can help you find businesses in an area if you feel like Apple's Maps is not listing them.
6) There are apps that display StreetView images if you still rely on that.
7) Look and see what Apple Maps offers you for transit maps in the area as they can also be useful for finding other things or just getting around town.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
In retrospect, Apple should have kept Google maps in iOS for another year, and rolled out iOS maps first as an app. That way they would have had time to debug, and get a more graceful market introduction. I suspect that the problem is that Apple did not do enough iOS maps testing in advance, and was blindsided by all of the post-launch problems. Given that this is a safety issue, this is actually a pretty big fail.
You don't help your enemy when he's digging his own hole.
The first part of that, "you don't help your own enemy", is exactly why Apple needed to stop using Google for maps...
But if they were smart they would be eager to release an app. After all, from this point on Apple is going to start using the maps feedback to improve the map. Now while so many people are criticizing the Apple maps is the time for Google to stand up an alternative map app for people to get used to using; if they did so they might not switch back to using Apple for maps for some time, and Google could continue gathering valuable information about map use.
If Google could actually kill Apple by not giving map support that would be one thing. But that's not going to happen, so it would be better to do something that helps Google more even if it helps Apple a bit also.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Eventually, iOS users who don't want to wait for Apple-Google parity will be able to download native a native version of Google's maps
You mean an application that duplicates the functionality of a built-in app?
You really think Apple is going to allow this in the iOS store?
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Of course, John Gruber would never post anything negative about Apple or would never admit to them making a mistake. So we can pretty much discount his opinion and pure "damage control". That's what he always does anyhow. I don't know why people still defer to him, he's basically Apple's PR machine, along with AllThingsD.com.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
John Gruber would never post anything negative about Apple or would never admit to them making a mistake.
You don't actually read his site, do you?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
i still think of Cisco.
Actually, no. John Gruber is often an Apple apologinista, but he has been more than willing to call out Apple when he thinks they have done something wrong. For example, he frequently runs a "WTF App Store?" article on some odd App store rejection or other.
Apple was not forced to do anything. They chose to seek other sources because they wanted full control.
From the article:
Apple had plenty of opportunities to improve their navigation app without Google's help. For starters, they could have made it so that the phone wouldn't lock itself when in navigation mode. I can't count the number of seconds I had to take my eyes off of the road to enter my password. Apple: people use this app while operating a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds - I thought you were the guys that put thought into the user experience of your software. I hope for everyone's safety that this "feature" has been fixed.
And finally, I'm not trying to troll here, but I can't help but wonder how all of this would be playing out if Google had patented every trivial feature of their map and navigation software like Apple does for all of its apps. That would certainly have made this scenario a hell of a lot more interesting.
MapQuest is, by far, a better app than both Apple Maps and Google Maps combined.
It has some nice features and the map looks nice BUT....
For one thing it's ad supported. That occurs in a few different ways in the UI, in traditional banner ads but also branded searching tabs at the bottom.
The bigger issue is the first search I did, it gave me a result with a store that is actually across town but it placed within a mile of me... that's exactly the kind of thing Apple caught flack for, and rightfully so when it happens. For me Apple Maps has not failed to correctly locate a local place or business, so the fact that Mapquest did not makes me wonder if it might not have the same issues and not really be a good alternative.
I don't see any way to give feedback in the Mapquest app, at least with the Apple maps if it gets something wrong I can tell it so.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Of course, John Gruber would never post anything negative about Apple or would never admit to them making a mistake.
Actually he has; but let's say that's true.
So we can pretty much discount his opinion and pure "damage control".
I disagree. That's Apple's response, sure. But Gruber is really digging to find out what is going on, and he does as the OP says have very close sources. Even with the (valid) assumption the report comes through very Apple colored glasses, it still reads as probably quite accurate - can you find a flaw in his timing argument for example? That is a very well reasoned argument for why, if Apple was going to move from Google maps, they had to do so now instead of the exact end of the contract, for all the reasons he mentions.
Gruber being biased towards Apple does not change any of the facts Apple was up against in making the choices they made, which we are getting from multiple sources beyond just Gruber (like Maps contract expiring in a year). The pro-Apple view comes into play more in thinking about the choices Apple made being either good or bad ones, not as much about the facts themselves when we have corroboration from elsewhere.
Do not forget that BOTH companies are attempting spin control on this issue, not just Apple. Google for example wants to distract from Apple shipping 3D maps to consumers in an included map app first (yes they had Google Earth, but it was always more of a side project and not yet integrated into maps on mobile devices). Of course Nokia was ahead of both of them... it's interesting that no-one complained of similar 3D warping errors in that case.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Yeah, because if you nit pick the small stuff you can claim to be fair when you apologize for the big stuff.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
They do want to grab angry iOS users. But they want to do so by switching them to Android instead.
It's true in the short term that Google may get some new Android users out of this. But not nearly as many as they have lost from Apple switching maps away from Google (well over 100 million iPhones running around now). If Google had a mapping app ready now, they could have got a significant percentage - say 10-20 percent - of them back as Google Maps users.
Longer term Apple will be able to use a large number of people to rapidly improve map quality. Longer term people will find that apps are providing better transit guidance than Google is able to give, and third party transit apps are integrated into Apple maps in a way that Google is unlikely to follow with since Google is trying to gather data about what you want to do, and they are blind if you go into a third-party app for transit.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You mean an application that duplicates the functionality of a built-in app?
You really think Apple is going to allow this in the iOS store?
I'm wondering about the legality of such a rule. Back in the day, Microsoft got a lot of flak just for having IE built in the OS; imagine what would have happened if they would have said: "sorry, Win95 has a built-in web browser, there is no need for an alternative browser, such as Netscape, and we won't allow it!"...
the apple defense is that they aren't a monopoly.
that's the apple defense to all allegations about unfair practices, pretty much.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Pretty much the definition of "fait and balanced" right there.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
With his little tank?
-- Linux user #369862
Your conspiracy theory wouldn't be convincing even if your facts were correct, but few of them are.
both Apple decision to source OSM and the license change happened in 2010
I've been an OpenStreetMap contributor since 2008, and the license change discussions had already been started back then. You can find evidence of the process throughout the project's documentation and mailing lists, but for an obvious example look at the revision history of the OpenStreetMap wiki page for "Open Database License" (OSM's new license) and notice that the first version is from February 2008 and already describes the characteristics that define this license today.
loosing roughly 30% of map data in the process
This is a massive exaggeration of the effects of the license change, as the actual numbers for data loss are in the low one-digit figures.
Details depend on how you count, and unfortunately some areas - particularly Australia and Poland - were hit disproportionately hard. But even though this is indeed a setback for those regions, thanks to the continuing growth the current version of the database already contains more content than we had before the deletions (go to OSMstats and switch to the yearly graph; the dent in summer 2012 is from the license change). Even though this does not mean that all the damage has already been repaired, it makes me confident that the OSM community is up to the task.
took an Open Source map (OSM) and gave gave it to himself, without an obligation to share back the updates.
This misrepresents the purpose of the Open Database License. The ODbL has an exception for produced works such as image tiles or prints, but is otherwise a share alike license. So under the ODbL Apple would indeed be able to use OSM and keep the artistic components of their products, i.e. their pretty map designs, to themselves, but updates to the underlying factual data (and derivative databases such as routing graphs) would have to be open sourced.
But the most important fact that you are missing: Apple is not actually using much, if any OpenStreetMap data under the new license! The situation is somewhat confusing, though:
So if Apple indeed set up an elaborate conspiracy to have OSM release their data under ODbL, why aren't they using it?
TL;DR: There is neither a plausible connection between Apple and the OpenStreetMap license change, nor has the event damaged OpenStreetMap even remotely to the extent suggested by the parent's factually incorrect description.
You mean read his stupid crap snarky sneering comparisons on Amazon's earnings vs. Apple's ?
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/07/27/amzn-profit-correction
Or calling Apple's competitors turds?
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/08/01/nokia-nail-polish
Or his various hate filled diatribes on Google and Android? Or how he stated that Android would never overtake the iPhone? And then how he tried to muddy the waters by adding the iPad numbers to claim iOS' superiority? After even that failed, he(and his chums like Siegler) resorted to calling the Apple winner over Android because it takes 80% of the mobile profits! Like how MS wins the server OS market and the web server market and the IDE market with Windows Server, IIS and Visual Studio over Linux, Apache/nginx etc.
For proof of his partisanship see his analysis of Apple's forced 30% cut of in-app purchases over which it kicked out a number of apps.
http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/dirty_percent
Summary: Apple does it because it can and people complaining are doing so because they're jealous they can't do the same thing.
In short, he's nothing but a partisan hack. Actually anyone would be, if they could earn $3000 per RSS ad while lounging around in pyjamas looking for tidbits of news and "analysis" to post pandering to the typical type of audience he attracts.
Spoken like someone who's probably never picked up an iPhone in his life. Select contact. Click-Hold address. Select Copy. go to whatever maps app or webisite you like and click paste.
It's really that simple. The whole maps 'disaster' is so overblown it's hilarious. If you live in any larger city, chances are you will never notice an issue that impacts you in any meaningful way. About the only useful info that's lacking are bus routes/times.
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/gadgetbox/apple-maps-furor-overblown-1B6071011
The rest of the issues are cosmetic. Is it perfect? No. Am I getting 'fucked' because of it? No. Hell, even Motorola's own commercial had to fake a bad address to do their commercial.
http://www.bgr.com/2012/09/27/apple-maps-motorola-criticism-fail/
The first link breaks it down into a little more 'sane' dialog.
A) There are flaws in Apple's Maps database.
B) These flaws very likely do not affect you in any way.
C) These flaws will be fixed and served up without you updating any software.
D) There is a lack of public transit information, which may or may not affect you, but is partially remedied by apps.
E) You now get free turn-by-turn navigation and instant links to Yelp pages â" and no ads.
F) GPS-enabled Google Maps are still available on iPhones and iPads for free, through the Safari browser.
G) A Google Maps app for iOS will likely be here soon, too.
"Spoken like someone who's probably never picked up an iPhone in his life. Select contact. Click-Hold address. Select Copy. go to whatever maps app or webisite you like and click paste."
As oposed to finding your contact and taping in the mini map that appears with it, right? What if im driving? Will siri open a google maps app for my contact? Yeah, didnt think so.
And if the new maps app isnt all that good in the US and the UK, how the fuck do you think it will do in Mexico. And YES im just ranting because YES, im stuck with the damned thing. I will change to iphone 5 anyhow because im apple all the way.
For this change yes, i will say again and again: fuck them and the horse they rode in on until they get me perfect maps at least as good as I have right now.
NO SIG
That's a nice story. The problem with it is that, in the real world, the Maps app on iOS was maintained (such as it, which was not very much) by Apple. Google wasn't the app supplier, it was the map data provider.
So, if anyone was responsible for the UX experience of the iOS Maps app not keeping up with the UX of the equivalent Android app, it was Apple. (Well, I guess you can blame Google for working more on the Android app than Apple was willing to bother working on the iOS app.)
If Apple's concern was UX rather than continuing Jobs promised nuclear war with Google, they would have spent their resources making UX improvements (and not faced the blowback from dropping popular features that depended on Google's data resources) rather than on purchasing other companies so that they could replace Google as the backend data supplier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_map_services
People forget they bought Navteq in 2007. Wonder why they did that now...
Yahoo maps: Nokia
Garmin: Nokia data
Mapquest: Nokia data
Navigon: Nokia data
Onstar: Nokia data
Amazon: Nokia maps
Microsoft Bing maps: See the Nokia logo at the bottom?
Pretty much every in car system on the planet uses Nokia data.
The list just goes on and on. But why would a ***mobile*** phone company care? Did you notice I highlighted the word "mobile"?
Now look at their new phones, the 920 now has "citylens" which is first generation augmented reality. You can use it to "see through" buildings to find things nearby. They added Nokia Transport public transport and Nokia Drive turn by turn navigation. Their music app gives you nearby gigs.
Nokia phones are going to be *highly* context aware, with superb 2D & 3D data and superb POIs. Google's the only other company which is even close with respect to mapping on mobiles. As you've seen
http://theamazingios6maps.tumblr.com/
Apple Maps is now *years* (longer) behind in terms of data, they have a vast area to cover. They totally blew it when they told Google to go take a running jump.
What I find amusing is that Apple have a hundred billion dollars that they have no idea what to do with. Looks like they're now going to have to try and hire thousands of Nokia and Google map experts (and no, we're not just talking about software developers, they are ten a penny in comparison).
Deleted
A) There are flaws in Apple's Maps database.
B) These flaws very likely do not affect you in any way.
I live in a medium-sized (1.3 million) city in a Western industrialised nation (Australia) and Apple Maps is worse than useless. At an anecdotal guess I'd say 75% of my searches for established well-known businesses and locations in my city give me "No Results Found"; 25% are laughably incorrect; maybe 25% are useful.
An Apple product that only does what I need 1 out of 4 times is a horrible failure.
Spoken like someone who probably never traveled outside of the USA. When you say big city, does the second biggest city in Sweden count? Because if it does, I can tell you it's missing completely from Apple gaps (seems like a more accurate name for what it is).
I'm loving the new Apple maps, at least here in the US. Seems to have no problem finding addresses, and features spoken, turn by turn instructions. Used them extensively this weekend. Huge upgrade over the old Google maps.
Now, apparently the default maps app sucks - at least for the moment - in many countries overseas. China oddly enough not being one of them. The Chinese are apparently marveling at how much better Apple's map app is than Google's. Go figure.
Seems to depend a lot on the quality of the map database Apple bought in each country. In the US they bought their data from Tom Tom, which is pretty high quality (for driving, anyhow). Overseas looks like it's a crap shoot.
I think a lot of users are going to read the hysteria surrounding Apple's maps, then have an experience similar to mine and wonder what the Fandroids are all smoking. Apple's critics keep doing this ("Antennagate" being the best example), and come off looking like idiots as a result.