Why Apple Replaced iOS Maps

Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Fireball by Tufriast · 2012-09-27 05:48 · Score: 5, Informative

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

Competition by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:49 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.

Re:Competition by Albanach · 2012-09-27 06:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

There are no real competitors for Google Maps.

Other than Bing, MapQuest, TomTom, Garmin, iGo?
Re:Competition by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-09-27 06:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

I suspect he refers to terrain and road map data, but not POI. Google has a very good POI database, seemingly the best of all that I've tried, and for typical smartphone scenarios (like quickly finding a decent restaurant nearby) this is more important. On the other hand, if you "use your phone as GPS", by which I suspect he meant navigation, you want quality maps.
Re:Competition by Baba+Ram+Dass · 2012-09-27 06:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

You miss the point. Most Android phones have Google Maps preinstalled. Imagine if iPhones started shipping with something else. Doesn't matter if it's a custom Apple app or if they used MapQuest. The ubiquity of such a product would immediately provide significant competition to Google Maps. As an Android user I would love that if it means my Google Maps improves somehow as a result.

--
Truckin like the Doo-Dah man...

They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by Rob+Y. · 2012-09-27 05:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

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...

Re:They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

If Apple wouldn't agree to the essentially no-cost, no risk concession of more prominent branding why on earth would they render some portion of their patent arsenal worthless vis-a-vis their largest mobile OS rival?
Re:They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by quacking+duck · 2012-09-27 06:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

You pretty much hit on why Apple probably decided *not* to continue using GMaps. As part of its long-term strategy Apple is trying to remove from the core iOS and apps, anything that might help Google. This includes search terms to improve Google's systems (information denial), as well as any ad click-throughs on map search results (revenue denial).
Re:They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 06:26 · Score: 5, Informative

The iOS maps app was written by Apple using Google's map data. Google didn't get any ad clicks out of it. There were no ads. They could track what tiles you requested and perhaps serve better ads to you later but, again, there are no map ads.
Re:They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by dave562 · 2012-09-27 06:37 · Score: 4, Informative

Undoing a bunch of moderation to post... grrrrrr.
Google Maps on my Droid Razr absolutely supports rotating the map. Hold one finger on the center of the map and then drag another finger left to right above it. The map will rotate around the pivot point of the first finger.
The same technique does not work on a first generation Samsung Galaxy, so it is somewhat device dependent.
Re:They're really playing for keeps, aren't they? by fermion · 2012-09-27 06:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple, by all indications, was significantly funding the development of a competitors platform through licensing payments to Google. The competitor, Google, provided significant technology for Apple, but refused to provide the most advanced technology for Apple. Google was acting rationally by playing hardball on exclusive technology for Android. Apple is acting rationally by saying we are no longer going to fund the development of Android.
Apple has a user base and has time to create a better map software, just like they were given time to make a better phone. OTOH, with Apple Maps in disarray, all the Apple users who are locked into contracts are going to be looking for better maps. There are better navigation maps that cost very little money on IOS. Mapquest, as a has been mentioned, is a good alternative. With increased use and more ad funding, Mapquest can be very good. Mapquest was what we all used before google came along with it's pretty pictures.
The danger here is 100% google. If users do not see a Google App in the next few weeks, many will have gone other places. For travel, the thing Google has is Buses. Mapquest, for instance, has the ability to match that. It has in some cities. For many Apple users, the new maps is good enough. Google took a risk and lost some branding.

--
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black

"Apple was forced"? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

Re:"Apple was forced"? by interkin3tic · 2012-09-27 07:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

One wonders what WOULD have been acceptable terms for apple. "We demand you give us turn by turn navigation. In exchange we will allow you a limited existence on the iphone. Which WILL BE the only mobile platform out there once we sue all your pathetic android makers into oblivion! MUHAHAHAHAH!!! BEG FOR YOUR MOBILE LIFE, GOOGLE!!!!"
Re:"Apple was forced"? by narcc · 2012-09-27 08:42 · Score: 4, Insightful

Indeed. Forced implies they had no choice -- which is just crazy.
Apple: "We want more!"
Google: "Sure, can you make one of these concessions in exchange?"
Apple: "No. We want it for nothing."
Goolge: "That's not what 'renegotiate' generally mea...."
Apple: "You're forcing us to drop your app!"

--
Required reading for internet skeptics

Try using maps; but other options also exist by SuperKendall · 2012-09-27 05:55 · Score: 5, Informative

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

Re:Try using maps; but other options also exist by Dan667 · 2012-09-27 06:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

or get and Android Phone. That is what I am going to do.
Re:Try using maps; but other options also exist by Mantle · 2012-09-27 06:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

The problem is I can't "try" Apple maps, I can only commit to it. Once I have installed iOS 6, I cannot go back to iOS 5 on my device.

iOS maps should have started as an App by Steve1952 · 2012-09-27 05:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

Re:iOS maps should have started as an App by DCstewieG · 2012-09-27 06:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

As I understand it, the old Maps app used Google's data but was still made by Apple. Google now needs to make their own app from scratch.

Google Maps for iOS 6? Ha! by VGPowerlord · 2012-09-27 06:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

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

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by RedK · 2012-09-27 06:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

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

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by jcr · 2012-09-27 06:10 · Score: 5, Insightful

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."

every time i hear iOS by who_stole_my_kidneys · 2012-09-27 06:15 · Score: 5, Funny

i still think of Cisco.

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by Dhrakar · 2012-09-27 06:15 · Score: 4, Informative

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.

A Few Key Points by organgtool · 2012-09-27 06:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

From the summary:

As a result Apple was forced to seek other sources in order to obtain this feature.

Apple was not forced to do anything. They chose to seek other sources because they wanted full control.

From the article:

Requiring iPhone users to look directly at handsets for directions and manually move through each step — while Android users enjoyed native voice-guided instructions — put Apple at a clear disadvantage in the mobile space.

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.

Mixed bag, gave bad search result in test by SuperKendall · 2012-09-27 06:17 · Score: 4, Informative

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

Bias trumped by verified information by SuperKendall · 2012-09-27 06:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

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

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by Mike+Buddha · 2012-09-27 06:38 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

That's a short term play by SuperKendall · 2012-09-27 06:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

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

Re:Apple killed Open Street Map in the process by Tordanik · 2012-09-27 07:51 · Score: 5, Informative

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:

Apple have been using OSM as their primary data source for iPhoto background maps since March. This was widely published and also acknowledged by the OpenStreetMap Foundation. To everyone's astonishment, though, they decided to use a two year old dump of the OpenStreetMap database for that application ... which also means this data is not affected by the license change at all.
Apple list OSM as one of many sources for their recently released iOS maps here. They fail to mention the license (which incidentally is an, albeit minor, violation of the requirements of both the old and new license). As a result, it is hard to tell whether they have used post-license change data this time.
Even though some traces of OSM data in iOS maps have been spotted, this is only the case in a few remote areas (Islamabad is one of the more convincing examples). Early assumptions that OSM data might be responsible for some prominent errors e.g. in Japan have turned out to be incorrect. In fact, many of those errors would have been avoided had Apple actually used OSM data there.

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.

No need to.... by mystikkman · 2012-09-27 08:02 · Score: 5, Informative

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.

Re:No need to.... by Karlt1 · 2012-09-27 08:45 · Score: 4, Insightful

"You mean read his stupid crap snarky sneering comparisons on Amazon's earnings vs. Apple's ?"
Is it not the truth?
"And then how he tried to muddy the waters by adding the iPad numbers to claim iOS' superiority? "
How so? When Google talks about "Android activations" do they leave out tablets?
"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! "
As a profit seeking entity, isn't profit the most important measure of success? How can a money losing company - i.e. every Android manufacturer except for Samsung and HTC (barely) be considered "successfully"?
"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://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/03/new-android-market-rule-prohibits-apps-that-use-third-party-in-app-payment-services/
Re:No need to.... by recoiledsnake · 2012-09-27 09:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

"You mean read his stupid crap snarky sneering comparisons on Amazon's earnings vs. Apple's ?"
Is it not the truth?
No, it's very misleading because Amazon is investing the profits into expansion which is way different from a company struggling to make money which Gruber wants to portray it as, comparing profit like the way he did is ridiculous. And it looks like it worked, with people like you thinking profits mean everything. Check the stock market reaction to earnings and you'll know why it is misleading.

As a profit seeking entity, isn't profit the most important measure of success? How can a money losing company - i.e. every Android manufacturer except for Samsung and HTC (barely) be considered "successfully"?
Because marketshare also matters, and Android is clearly winning there. Picking the metric that best suits Apple because Apple's losing on other metrics is a pretty lame tactic. By that metric Microsoft is winning over Linux and Apache in the server and web server market.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/03/new-android-market-rule-prohibits-apps-that-use-third-party-in-app-payment-services/ [arstechnica.com]
Ah, the classic technique of showing Android is just as bad? But sorry, your own link says this:

By comparison, Apple also prohibits the use of third-party payment systems in applications sold through its iOS App Store. A key difference, however, is that Google offers exceptions for retailers of physical and virtual goods (including ebooks). It's also worth noting that Android's support for application sideloading and alternate distribution channels will mean Android application developers have the option of not complying with Google's new rules, assuming they are willing to sacrifice the advantages of having a presence in the platform's standard marketplace.
Which means you can buy ebooks from the Kindle app on Android, but you cannot on iDevices. Read it later was kicked out because of Apple's policy (which was ironic given that Apple used their OSS code in Safari for a similar feature).
http://readitlaterlist.com/blog/2010/08/version-2-2-rejected-new-rejection-reason-from-apple-may-have-major-implications/
Also, your link fails to address the fact that Microsoft allows third party payments in the Windows App Store. Perhaps you should try reading some other sources of news instead of living in the Daring Fireball bubble.

--
This space for rent.
Re:No need to.... by jcr · 2012-09-27 09:39 · Score: 4, Insightful

calling the Apple winner over Android because it takes 80% of the mobile profits!
Where I come from, earning a profit is success. Earning 80% of the profit in a market segment is winning, big-time.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:No need to.... by Solandri · 2012-09-27 10:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

"And then how he tried to muddy the waters by adding the iPad numbers to claim iOS' superiority? "
How so? When Google talks about "Android activations" do they leave out tablets?
Generally when one makes a prediction, one sets out the conditions by which the prediction will be measured at the time the prediction is made. e.g. If you make a prediction about phone OS share, then it's a prediction about phone OS share. If the prediction turns out wrong, you don't get to retroactively change it to include other data to make it arrive at the result you want.

Within those confines, you're free to compare and predict whatever you want. If you want to make a prediction about phones, you make it about phones. If you want to make a prediction about phones + tablets, that's what you predict. If you want to make a prediction about iOS taking over the world and displacing Windows, that's what you predict.

"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! "
As a profit seeking entity, isn't profit the most important measure of success? How can a money losing company - i.e. every Android manufacturer except for Samsung and HTC (barely) be considered "successfully"?
There are thousands of different metrics which one could use to measure success. If you're free to pick and choose which one to use after the fact, it's almost a statistical certainty that there will be some metric which supports your hypothesis. That's why all the investment firms advertising their "top-performing funds" are bunk. Whether or not they have some funds which out-performed the market by 40% last year is irrelevant. What matters is how likely a customer was to have picked one of those funds before they out-performed the market.

That's why you need to set the conditions of a prediction at the time of the prediction. e.g. Investment firm predicts that their funds A, B, and C will outperform the market by 40% the following year. If you don't establish these conditions ahead of time, you're just cherry-picking data which fits your hypothesis.

That's the criticism being leveled against Apple supporters. First it was all about the UI. Then when that was matched it suddenly became about size (screen size and thinness of the iPad). When those were surpassed, it suddenly became about market share. Since iOS is a distant second now, it's suddenly about profits. At this point it's obvious to pretty much all unbiased observers that Apple supporters are just cherry-picking whatever stats support their argument that iOS is superior.

This has nothing to do with the conclusion of the argument - Apple products could very well be the best thing since sliced bread. But if the arguments supporting that assertion are this mutable and fickle, their reliability as an indicator of the strength of the conclusion is highly suspect. Statisticians, scientists, and people trying to be unbiased do not simply morph their argument every time it's disproven. They first question the validity of the hypothesis around which the argument was based. Failure to question the initial hypothesis is a pretty strong indicator of bias. Which was OP's point.

"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://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/03/new-android-market-rule-prohibits-apps-that-use-third-party-in-app-payment-services/

The key difference here is that Apple's App Store is your only way to get binaries onto an iOS device. If you don't like Google's Market/Play policies, you can use any of the countless other markets for Android. Heck, you don't even need a market. Just put your Android app binary on any old web page and give people the URL.
Re:No need to.... by Karlt1 · 2012-09-27 10:53 · Score: 4, Insightful

"No, it's very misleading because Amazon is investing the profits into expansion which is way different from a company struggling to make money which Gruber wants to portray it as, comparing profit like the way he did is ridiculous. And it looks like it worked, with people like you thinking profits mean everything. Check the stock market reaction to earnings and you'll know why it is misleading."
Amazon has been in business since 1994. How many more years will Amazon be "re-invsesting profits" for growth?
In 1997, Apple was nearly bankrupt, and now it has $100 billion in the bank. Which company has done better?
"Because marketshare also matters, and Android is clearly winning there."
So who does marketshare matter to?
The OEMs who are all losing money except for Samsung and HTC (barely?)
Google? Who according to there own testimony before Congress get 66% of their mobile profits from iOS devices? And then spent two years worth of their net income to buy the money-losing Motorola Mobility?
The third party developers who get an average only a quarter for every dollar on Android compared to Apple?
Web advertisers where iOS traffic is 4x that of Android traffic?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57464763-37/apples-ios-grabs-65-of-mobile-web-traffic/)
"Read it later was kicked out because of Apple's policy (which was ironic given that Apple used their OSS code in Safari for a similar feature)."
Huh?
Re:No need to.... by jcr · 2012-09-27 14:50 · Score: 4, Funny

Sure they are. What's your point?
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."

*Nokia* is the other mapping giant by Colin+Smith · 2012-09-27 09:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

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

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by Swampash · 2012-09-27 10:36 · Score: 4, Informative

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.

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by muffen · 2012-09-27 10:40 · Score: 5, Informative

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).

Re:Here is more from John Gruber of Daring Firebal by sunspot42 · 2012-09-27 11:08 · Score: 4, Insightful

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.

Re:Google map data, not app, supplier on iOS pre-6 by beejhuff · 2012-09-27 13:32 · Score: 4, Informative

This is incorrect and refuted in TFA.

Apple did not request turn-by-turn in their original licensing agreement. When they realized they wanted to add it to their iOS app, they went back to Google and Google offered to add turn-by-turn but required additional branding in the app as part of the deal.

Apple refused.

Agree or disagree with whether or not it was a good decision, but it was APPLE's decision to refuse the terms. Google did not refuse to allow turn by turn - Apple just didn't get that it was important when they did original negotiations.

Posted from iPad, in case you thought I was a hater.

--
Bryan "BJ" Hoffpauir

42 of 561 comments (clear)