Revamped Google Maps Finally Available On iOS

hcs_$reboot writes "After the disastrous Apple Maps replacement over Google Maps in September, Google has a Maps app on iOS approved and released by Apple today. The app includes turn-by-turn directions, vector-based graphics and live traffic data. It's available from the Apple Store for iPhone and iPod touch (and iPad — iPhone format)." Adds reader snowtigger: "It's a sharper looking, vector-based map that loads quickly and provides smooth tilting and rotating of 2D and 3D views. Google also released the Google Maps SDK for iOS, and a simple URL scheme to help developers use Google Maps when building their beautiful and innovative apps. The new Google Maps app is available for the iPhone and iPod Touch (4th gen) iOS 5.1 and higher, in more than 40 countries and 29 languages." SlashCloud points out that Apple's own maps will be forced to improve as a consequence: "Directions will become more accurate, major towns and landmarks will appear in their proper places. But now that a free, standalone Google Maps app is available for download from Apple’s App Store, will iOS users even give those improving Apple Maps a chance?"

Comments

ontrack

[Korruptionen]

The Apple Maps app honestly never let me down. I know I've read reports of it causing people to go odd places... but cannot say it happened to me.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the useless anecdote.

Apple maps were obviously a large regression from Google maps, so it's good to have that finally fixed.

Re:ontrack

[slashmydots]

It labeled the US as Australia in most views. What planet are you using it on?

Re:ontrack

[alen]

most of the complaints were from europe and outside the US. in the US it was pretty good mostly for turn by turn voice nav

the POI was worse than google along with the address parsing. you had to type in an address exactly the way it had it stored in its database

Re:ontrack

[slashmydots]

You must only be using it to go between your house and the Apple PR department office then.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apple Maps app honestly never let me down. I know I've read reports of it causing people to go odd places... but cannot say it happened to me.

Me either. The directions, including turn-by-turn, worked fine.

The reason I'm getting the Google version is for public transportation directions, which the Apple app doesn't do. (Navigating strange public transportation systems when you've just landed in a strange city and don't have a car is pretty high on the list for smartphone use cases in my opinion.)

Re:ontrack

[girlintraining]

You must only be using it to go between your house and the Apple PR department office then.

Apple's PR office isn't in Apple Maps. If he tried using it to get there, then that slashdot post was probably his last act on Earth.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apple Maps app honestly never let me down. I know I've read reports of it causing people to go odd places... but cannot say it happened to me.

So, because it supposed to sound like it works for you, means that all other reports about it not working has no bearing at all? No idea why anyone would mod your post insightful.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not really a useless anecdote: apple maps led him to slashdot, tho he had asked to go to uselessanecdote.com.

Re:ontrack

[girlintraining]

Apple maps were obviously a large regression from Google maps, so it's good to have that finally fixed.

You must be using the Apple definition of "fixed", which is similar to the Apple definition of an "upgrade": You get a new one.

Re:ontrack

[Korruptionen]

Hah! As much as I use macs both personally and in my profession, far from the Apple fanboy status, I assure you.

Just was making an honest statement about my experiences with Apple Maps. I can aim to come up with something immediately more negative next time if you would like. :)

Re:ontrack

[Thud457]

"Fucking Mapquest^W IOS maps!"
-- John McAfee

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

...typical Google spin view of the world. If Google would have bothered to keep the iOS version even close to what they offered in Android, they would not have been off the platform. By kicking them off, Google lost yet another data source for their primary business, so they needed to bring a version back to iOS, and they needed to add features to at least bring it back in parity with the Apple version.

The same result was achieved in kicking youtube, where Google did nothing to improve the app for years. Now that they need people to download it so they can collect data, they have started actually putting effort into it.

I am always amazed all the Google fans here fail to realize they are just like Microsoft and Apple. Without competition, they will cease updating and driving their products forward, much like Microsoft stopped IE development effectively for years until Firefox started taking their market share. Google had largely ignored many of their applications in iOS for years because they were pre-loaded, so no need to bother trying to get people to go the app store and download them.

I am glad the Google's solution is back. I have not had the problems others have had with Apple maps, so I will probably continue to use it over Google. But now I have more choice. I hope Apple, Google, and Microsoft all continue to be competitive so that we can have more choice and better solutions.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

If Google would have bothered to keep the iOS version even close to what they offered in Android

Google never wrote the old Maps app for iOS. Google supplied map data and Apple wrote the app; that was the arrangement from the beginning. Ditto for the Youtube app: Google never even saw the source code for it, much less wrote any of it.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

you also had to enter the address. i live in the US and tried using it multiple times. if i entered the name of anything, it would take me to the wrong place. the POI database is either really horrible or they just don't know how to correctly search the database. either way, it made apple maps unusable for me unless i knew the exact address.

Re:ontrack

[slashmydots]

If Apple Maps is working correctly, you must be holding it wrong because it's not supposed to work like that

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

He typed it in, and from the back of the iDevice a mechanical arm reached over and yanked his wheel, sending him careening off the highway.

Re:ontrack

[samkass]

If Google would have bothered to keep the iOS version even close to what they offered in Android

Google never wrote the old Maps app for iOS. Google supplied map data and Apple wrote the app; that was the arrangement from the beginning. Ditto for the Youtube app: Google never even saw the source code for it, much less wrote any of it.

You're both right, according to the best public information available... Apple wrote the app, but was only licensed to use the raster data and forbidden from doing turn-by-turn directions or other modern features by the license. Google refused to renew the license without adding all kinds of tracking into iOS, which Apple refused to allow. Since the license was set to expire before the next major version of iOS would have come out, Apple was forced to switch maps in this version.

And it mostly succeeded. It's hard to argue that the new map imagery isn't way, way better than what Google previously licensed Apple. Map imagery is crisper, faster, caches better, and is generally more readable. And routing directions are actually pretty good, taking into account traffic, etc. It's really just the geo-location that Apple dropped the ball on, and the public transit that Apple needlessly complicated.

Geo-location is quickly being fixed, but is the biggest glaring problem and really the crux of the matter. Public transit has a million other alternatives in most metropolitan areas and does link directly from Maps, but is less convenient... hopefully Apple will revamp this in iOS 7 and allow integrated plugins for Maps.

In the meantime, it's nice to see Google bringing an alternative to the platform, for anyone willing to trade their privacy for better geolocation.

Re:ontrack

[Skuld-Chan]

tl:dr

Apple maps was an improvement over the previous google maps except it couldn't tell you where stuff actually was.

Re:ontrack

[shutdown -p now]

Google refused to renew the license without adding all kinds of tracking into iOS, which Apple refused to allow

"Adding all kinds of tracking" sounds ominous, but in reality Google asked for Latitude to be included. This is an opt-in service that enables people to publish their location to each other, either manually or automatically. So it's not like Google wanted some spyware to be installed into iOS that would keep tabs on every single user - only those who specifically ask for it get it.

And it mostly succeeded. It's hard to argue that the new map imagery isn't way, way better than what Google previously licensed Apple. Map imagery is crisper, faster, caches better, and is generally more readable.

Except for the areas where Apple map imagery is some ancient crappy black-and-white satellite photos. Or where the entire area is covered by clouds (including some major cities). And so on.

So, yes, it's very easy to argue that the new map imagery is not in any noticeable way better than what Google offered, and in many areas, it's actually worse.

Re:ontrack

[Gr8Apes]

"Adding all kinds of tracking" sounds ominous, but in reality Google asked for Latitude to be included. This is an opt-in service that enables people to publish their location to each other, either manually or automatically. So it's not like Google wanted some spyware to be installed into iOS that would keep tabs on every single user - only those who specifically ask for it get it.

Where Google's concerned - tracking information is tracking information, and you can probably ascribe the most evil of intentions to it. Ironic considering their initial stance as a company.

Except for the areas where Apple map imagery is some ancient crappy black-and-white satellite photos. Or where the entire area is covered by clouds (including some major cities). And so on.

So, yes, it's very easy to argue that the new map imagery is not in any noticeable way better than what Google offered, and in many areas, it's actually worse.

I recall Google having some of the same issues, even for places in N. America in major metro areas, not too long ago. My house, for instance, was incorrectly located until about 4 or 5 years ago. Roads in the area were mapped badly, in some cases not at all, as the map images were so out of date that the entire road system had changed, due to construction that lasted 3 years. (i.e., not like it was a secret, nor not well known for a considerable period of time)

So Apple's maps recently came out. They worked fine in several major metro areas I was in, although I did notice issues with GPS (not making apologies for it) but it did locate me near enough to where I was that with rudimentary map reading skills I could get to where I needed to go.

I also note that the Apple map app has forced Google to create a real map app. And that might be the biggest win for everyone involved.

Re:ontrack

[Culture20]

Apple maps has been wrong for me, and mostly because it can't find places, although sometimes because it puts things in the wrong place. Thankfully I'm not Australian, or I'd be dead in the Outback,

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

And the previous (ie. Google based) Maps on iOS was better because of it. It didn't have ads in the search results like Android's Maps has and they didn't implement that weird thing where if you try to pinch to zoom on Android, you end up spinning the map around (like that's a feature that anyone would ever want).

Re:ontrack

[Tharkkun]

Except realistic looking maps did nothing when the data in them was very inaccurate.

Re:ontrack

[Y-Crate]

Me either. The directions, including turn-by-turn, worked fine.

The reason I'm getting the Google version is for public transportation directions, which the Apple app doesn't do. (Navigating strange public transportation systems when you've just landed in a strange city and don't have a car is pretty high on the list for smartphone use cases in my opinion.)

Absolutely this.

I've tried the highest-rated transit apps, and the data from Google is usually more complete than what a 3rd party expects me to pay for (which is almost always free data sent out by transit agencies).

Also, there's no need to do the awkward switch out of Apple Maps when it comes time to find transit directions (and use a brand-new UI) and there's no need to learn a new app when traveling to a new city.

Re:ontrack

[Anonymous Coward]

if not this iphone, then we'll definately get it in the next... right?

Opportunity

[O('_')O_Bush]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google. Apple is a company that makes its money selling hardware with a proprietary OS, not homegrowing competitive and complex applications. They stretched themselves outside their realm of competency, and this is a good time to fix it.

Honestly, I don't get why they didn't support or help Google from the start. I would have thought that if they wanted to develop, they could have more easily come up with a frontend to several MS Office replacements and avoid all the BS with Office 365.

Re:Opportunity

[ipquickly]

I was hoping for Nokia to somehow be acquired by Apple.
That would probably solve the map issue and put Nokia out of its misery.

Re:Opportunity

[boristdog]

Maybe Apple just likes the taste of crow?

Re:Opportunity

[Sponge Bath]

...a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

This whole exercise demonstrated maps are a critical service and relying on a direct competitor for a critical service is a problem. As a result of Apple's actions, they have their own map service they are improving and Google's map service with features previously withheld. Win win for Apple, there is no going back.

Re:Opportunity

[degeneratemonkey]

Most likely a combination of internal politics and an ambitious project manager.

Re:Opportunity

[d3vi1]

If you were Apple, you wouldn't have survived the 90's.
While the Apple maps data is not the best in some places, I can say that they're doing a much better job improving than everyone else. It took Google a few years to have any roads listed in most European countries. Apple started with complete maps. I've compared the coverage of Apple, Google, Nokia, Bing and OSM on quite a few occasions and OSM is the only one better than the rest. Google, Apple, Nokia and Bing are not showing one third of the motorways in Romania. I'm not talking about a forgotten secondary road somewhere up in the mountains, I'm talking about (albeit a few) hundreds of kilometers of motorways.
The application isn't bad at all. It's still superior to Google's, at least for now. The data might be flawed in some places, but you should give them a few months to get it right. I'm quite sure that when Google Maps first appeared, their data wasn't optimal either. Their maps are now much better due to community effort in apps like mapmaker.
In case you're an idiot and couldn't figure this out by yourself, I'm going to spell it out: it makes perfect business sense to build your own maps application if your biggest competitors (Google, Microsoft, Nokia) all have their own solutions. What do you think the licensing costs would be if Apple attempted to license a maps solution from Nokia's Navteq or from Microsoft's Bing?

Re:Opportunity

[dingen]

Apparently some investors are thinking the same thing about Apple acquiring TomTom. I heard Robeco/Rabobank is very seriously considering this option.

Re:Opportunity

[d3vi1]

P.S.: Have you noticed how Google managed to come up with a decent Maps app in only 6 months? They completely neglected the iOS distributed app for years and only improved on Android until Apple kicked their arse back to work. I find that kind of competition to be healthy!

Re:Opportunity

[Goaway]

The whole reason they dropped Google Maps was that their contract with Google was up, and Google wouldn't renew it on terms acceptable by Apple. It wasn't about "supporting" or "helping" Google, it was entirely about what Google was asking in return for letting them use Google Maps.

Re:Opportunity

[Savage-Rabbit]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google. Apple is a company that makes its money selling hardware with a proprietary OS, not homegrowing competitive and complex applications. They stretched themselves outside their realm of competency, and this is a good time to fix it.

Honestly, I don't get why they didn't support or help Google from the start. I would have thought that if they wanted to develop, they could have more easily come up with a frontend to several MS Office replacements and avoid all the BS with Office 365.

Because allegedly Google wanted Apple to wallpaper the new iOS mapping app with the Google logo and integrate one of Google's social networking systems as a preconditions for allowing Apple to pay for the privilege of integrating new Google Maps features with iOS. How much of that is true I don't know but if even only half of it is true I would have said no too. Mind you, I would definitely have tried to find a better replacement maps provider than TomTom, like, say... Garmin or even Microsoft/Nokia. The Nokia maps are basic but accurate and so are Garmin's and you can fix things like satellite view. Features like transit directions take longer. I tried using a TomTom device for a few weeks in the UK this summer and TomTom quite frankly just sucks...

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

Well, knowing it takes Apple at least two weeks to change some text on their own website, we know that is not going to happen...

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this was part of the deal the whole time. Apple would use Google's map data to put together a maps app (the old Google Maps app itself was written by Apple), and Google wouldn't produce a competing Maps app for the platform. Then the deal expired, and we now have an Apple Maps app with crappy map data and a Google-written Google Maps app that looks a lot like the (fantastic) app they have for Android.

Re:Opportunity

[Cigarra]

Why is Google the villain? What if we put it this way?

"The whole reason they dropped Google Maps was that their contract with Google was up, and Apple wouldn't renew it on terms acceptable by Google. It wasn't about "supporting" or "helping" Google, it was entirely about what Apple was asking in return for allowing Google Maps in their OS"

Re:Opportunity

[jythie]

I would more say this was a win-win for Google. They made demands of Apple, Apple said 'no, we can do this without you', Apple took a huge PR hit for pushing out a sub-par application that did not have Google's data anymore... and now Google has swept in to save the day with their own branded application instead...

Google ends up looking good, Apple takes pretty much all the PR damage.. and Google gets to remind Apple who is more powerful.

Re:Opportunity

[alen]

nokia already has a free mapping/nav app on iOS. there is also navigon which uses navteq maps and has full offline capability

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

...a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

This whole exercise demonstrated maps are a critical service and relying on a direct competitor for a critical service is a problem. As a result of Apple's actions, they have their own map service they are improving and Google's map service with features previously withheld. Win win for Apple, there is no going back.

As a result of Apple's actions, they have their own map service THAT THEY HUMONGOUSLY SUCK AT and Google's map service with features previously withheld.

There, FTFY.

Re:Opportunity

[Fr33z0r]

Apple is a company that makes its money selling hardware with a proprietary OS, not homegrowing competitive and complex applications.

There's noting on any rival mobile platform which is remotely competitive with Garageband or iMovie on iOS.

Maps was a huge mistake, but to say they're incapable of making competitive apps is selling them short.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

If you were Apple, you would have sold the company to IBM in the '80s. Would have made a lot of sense.
If you were Apple, you would have dropped the Mac OS and become a Windows PC vendor in the '90s. Would have made a lot of sense.
If you were Apple, you would have given up on developing your own platform and focused on the iPod and internet music in the '00s. Would have made a lot of sense.

Re:Opportunity

[EMN13]

That's not a reasonable position for Apple to take; not at all. They could have simply left the old gmaps app since their license had not *yet* expired, and at least avoided this debacle. Furthermore, you present "plastering" google's logo all over the app as if its certain this was something truly terrible - when that's not sure at all; it's not unreasonable to claim credit for an app you made so a logo might be reasonable.

All in all - if both parties had wanted this to work out they would have made it work. It's certain apple wasn't being reasonable, and quite believable Google wasn't either (but we really only have Apple's word for that). In any case - it's Apple's device; they're Apple customers, and that makes it Apple's responsibility to come up with a solution that doesn't suck - whether that solution involves using an old-fashioned app for another year, or a different provider, or kowtowing to Google isn't really important.

Regardless of who else is involved, Apple chose to harm their customers, probably intentionally, because that fit their strategic aims better. Given apple's dealings with samsung (and others), Apple doesn't come across as a very open-minded company: does it really surprise anyone they played hardball even if doing so cost them something?

Put it this way: if you blame some third party for a seller's failure to provide quality goods, that's not exactly a great incentive for said seller to be fair with you the next time - why bother? Defending Apple for their abuse of their customers reminds me a little too much of the stockholm syndrome for comfort.

I don't think these power-fights are good for customers.

Re:Opportunity

[Psiren]

I tried using a TomTom device for a few weeks in the UK this summer and TomTom quite frankly just sucks...

This is clearly made up nonsense. We didn't have a summer in the UK this year.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

You do not acquire, or for that matter do business with, TomTom if you want accurate up-to-date maps. I would think that Garmin would be a much better choice based on my experiences with TomTom and Garmin stand alone GPS devices.

Re:Opportunity

[Dixie_Flatline]

Apple's system will pay dividends of its own--their integrated map system is something you can leverage as a developer, whereas before this whole kerfuffle, there was no API to interact with the Google system. Now that Google's been punted, they're coming back AND they're opening up their own API; what a surprise.

Sometimes change is good. Sometimes change that initially looks bad is also good. Apple is coming out ahead on this one--their maps application may not be the best, but it's questionable whether or not that's relevant, since they still have access to the best maps application in the mobile space, thoughtfully provided by their supposed competitor.

I think Google is wising up to the fact that they just need to be in every pocket, regardless of OS. They win with every sale of iOS AND Android that way.

Re:Opportunity

[BasilBrush]

Why is Google the villain?

No one said Google was the villain. No one has to be a villain. 2 companies simply failed to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. That doesn't make either of them wrong.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a whole bunch of non-sequiturs you got there.

Re:Opportunity

[BasilBrush]

and now Google has swept in to save the day with their own branded application instead...

But it doesn't ship with the device, so their customers aren't confronted with Google branding, unless and until they choose to download it.

Furthermore, if and when Apple Maps data is improved to be as good or better than Google Maps, people getting new devices won't choose to download Google Maps, as Apple Maps will already be there.

and Google gets to remind Apple who is more powerful.

Fundamentally it's all about profit, and how to achieve it. And Apple makes about 20 times the profit of Google. Your perception of power is weird, irrelevant and probably mistaken.

Re:Opportunity

[gutnor]

WinWin for us.

We used to have a sub-par Mapping application on iPhone. Now we have 2. Even better, with Apple pushing his own map app, Google will not be able to keep as under-featured as before.

At the end of the day, that's the take-home message for people looking at buying an iPhone. All the rest is just noise by people looking at the whole affair with their favorite-brand colored glasses.

Re:Opportunity

[medcalf]

Absolutely a win for consumers. We now have two vector-based maps apps with turn by turn directions and really clean interfaces, where before we had none. Google's data seems a little better, Apple's maps a little prettier. I suspect that both will improve over time: competition is good.

Re:Opportunity

[donny77]

Yes and no. The general public will largely see this the way you describe, but you are missing one key component. The demands Apple did not want to "give in to" were customer data and privacy demands specified in the Apple TOS. To get Google Maps in the App store, Google had to comply with those standards. So Google did not get everything they wanted. Apple has the features Android had in Google Maps without having to concede on the privacy standards they have set. So, in actuality, Apple did "win," just not in public opinion.

Re:Opportunity

[tiptone]

Apple wanted Google to add turn by turn navigation to the Maps app. Google wanted to the terms of the contract between them renegotiated since the original didn't include turn by turn navigation, even though Google had added it to their own Maps app in Android. Apple wanted new functionality added under the terms of the old contract, and Google wasn't willing.

Re:Opportunity

[BasilBrush]

Honestly, I don't get why they didn't support or help Google from the start.

They did. Apple was more then happy to work with Google the search, maps and video company. To the extent that they even had a Google exec on the Apple board of directors. (Eric Schmidt). Google was represented on the original iPhone by search, youTube and maps app. A positoin no other company had. And one could have expected that relationshop to grow through later revisions of iOS.

What stopped it was Google developing copy-cat phone OS of their own. It's a bad idea to de dependant on a competitor in the very same market. And so bit by bit, Google is being phased out of the OS and default application set.

For much the same reason, Apple is clearly moving towards eliminating Samsung components in their hardware.

Re:Opportunity

[93 Escort Wagon]

This whole exercise demonstrated maps are a critical service and relying on a direct competitor for a critical service is a problem. As a result of Apple's actions, they have their own map service they are improving and Google's map service with features previously withheld. Win win for Apple, there is no going back.

And now those of us who don't have the latest iPhone have turn-by-turn directions, which is a definite win. We get free Google Maps, and Apple doesn't have to pay Google for the privilege anymore.

I didn't have any map issues with Apple's directions or maps; but it seemed to me some add-on features like traffic didn't work as well as it did with the older Google-based version.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

Save the day, what a laugh.

What are the odds that the Google maps iApp gets installed on more than 10% of iOS devices? 50 to 1?

Re:Opportunity

[shadowrat]

And I, as a consumer, have one less thing pushing me out of the apple ecosystem. I'm still on course to buy an iphone 7.

Re:Opportunity

[93 Escort Wagon]

The data might be flawed in some places, but you should give them a few months to get it right. I'm quite sure that when Google Maps first appeared, their data wasn't optimal either. Their maps are now much better due to community effort in apps like mapmaker.

Actually I'd forgotten about this, but - for Google Maps' first couple years, when someone would look up my home address it would show them a location about ten miles from here - we used to have a good laugh about that.

Re:Opportunity

[tgibbs]

It's mainly a win for iDevice owners. Probably because of competition from Apple, the new Google Maps has the fast vector-based maps that Google never added to the old (Google) Maps app. The lack of a standard Apple app providing transit routing has led to a bunch of new apps offering this feature, so whereas before we had this only from Google, we now have it from a variety of apps. And we also have turn-by-turn from Apple, which Google not only never added to Maps, but even prohibited developers from implementing using Google's data. Indirectly, it is also a win for Apple, since it adds value to Apple's devices.

Re:Opportunity

[mk1004]

Just because moderators thinks someone's spin on the issue is insightful and yours is not is no reason to be bitter. In my view, both companies will go on and make bucket loads of money and in general be pretty darn successful. If one company does start to go downhill, the maps issues will, at best, be considered at that point to have been an early indicator predicting the fall. No more.

./ discussions are like both sides in a CX debate--if you don't agree with "our" position on an issue, the result will always be Global Nuclear War.

Re:Opportunity

[samkass]

nokia already has a free mapping/nav app on iOS. there is also navigon which uses navteq maps and has full offline capability

And whose interface is really, really awful. Reinforcing the point that Apple's design plus NavTeq's data could be a world-leading solution. At this point Nokia's actual handset business is probably worth less than the NavTeq acquisition... Apple could divest it to Microsoft or kill it without much problem. They've probably lost more market cap over maps than Nokia is worth in its entirety.

Re:Opportunity

[samkass]

Yes and no. The general public will largely see this the way you describe, but you are missing one key component. The demands Apple did not want to "give in to" were customer data and privacy demands specified in the Apple TOS. To get Google Maps in the App store, Google had to comply with those standards. So Google did not get everything they wanted. Apple has the features Android had in Google Maps without having to concede on the privacy standards they have set. So, in actuality, Apple did "win," just not in public opinion.

Apple doesn't require much privacy from app store apps. I suspect using Google's branded iOS Maps app will subject you to just as many privacy violations as any typical Google service (they'll monitor everything you do and everywhere you go and sell it to advertisers). But now there are real alternatives. NavTeq/Nokia, Apple, Google, and many city-specific apps are all thriving in a competitive marketplace.

Re:Opportunity

[VGPowerlord]

Apple did support & help Google from the very start - how exactly do you think Google maps got so good?

Google's Street View cars. You'd be amazed at how much accuracy improves when you have people actually driving down various roads world-wide.

Re:Opportunity

[shellbeach]

I would more say this was a win-win for Google. They made demands of Apple, Apple said 'no, we can do this without you', Apple took a huge PR hit for pushing out a sub-par application that did not have Google's data anymore... and now Google has swept in to save the day with their own branded application instead...

Also, Google managed to inflict the maximum damage on the iphone5 launch and during that time launched their own sell-out phone. Seems to have all worked out very well for Google, and very poorly for Apple.

What I'd really like to know is which company held-up the release of the new Google Maps -- was it Google seeking to maximise damages, or Apple in an attempt to crash-or-crash-through? I'm sure Google could have had the app released much sooner if both parties were willing ...

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you not on Slashdot more often!?

Re:Opportunity

[ceoyoyo]

Google's map app is pushing pretty hard to have you log in. It looks like it can't even remember a search history unless you're logged into your Google account.

I agree with posters further up - this is a win for users. We get Google maps encouraging Apple to improve, and we've got Apple maps if we get tired of being tracked everywhere by Google.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

You do not acquire, or for that matter do business with, TomTom if you want accurate up-to-date maps. I would think that Garmin would be a much better choice based on my experiences with TomTom and Garmin stand alone GPS devices.

Garmin uses Nokia (or to be more accurate, NAVTEQ) maps. It doesn't have maps of its own.

Re:Opportunity

[Cinder6]

This, exactly. When people say that they miss the old Maps app, I always wonder if they were using the same app as I was, because the old one was nigh unusable for me. No turn-by-turn, have to have the app open for it to be of any use, poor Siri integration, slow-rendering raster tiles... It just sucked.

So Apple dumps it for a variety of reasons and releases a new app based on their own data. The interface is far superior to the old app, it has vector tiles, turn-by-turn, and Siri integration. The problem? For lots of people, the map data itself isn't as good. Being kicked out forces Google to release their own, competitive app with the previously missing features. Since it will presumably have better map data, or at least POI data, this will force Apple to improve their own product.

This is how the free market is supposed to work. It's unfortunate Apple apparently rushed its inclusion of Maps in iOS 6, but every iOS user today is better off than they were with iOS 5.

There is one thing about this story that is odd, though, and that is that it took Google so long to make an app. The writing was on the wall for quite some time before iOS 6 was announced (let alone released), and yet they still seemed caught flat-footed. Also, I enjoy that everyone who claimed Apple would never allow this app into the store were all proven wrong.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

> If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

Which is why you will never be in charge of a major company.

Apple Maps was put in place so that Apple would be less dependent on Google... who is one of their major competitors with Android.

Re:Opportunity

[Cinder6]

Apple was in a lose-lose situation. On the one hand, they needed turn-by-turn and other features out-of-the-box to stay competitive with Android. They had a map app that wasn't yet ready for prime-time. They could have licensed the technology from Google, but they didn't want to give their chief OS competitor access to even more data on their users.

So they had 4 main choices:

1. Keep using the old Maps app and continue to be lacking in core functionality that Android has. Wait until iOS 7.
2. Delay the release of iOS 6. (A slight variation on #1.)
3. Agree to Google's terms and use their maps while still working on their own replacement.
4. Dump Google and release their app which still needed more work.

From a user standpoint, and from what I know of the issue, I tend to think that they should have opted for #3, but then again, I'm not privy to the actual licensing terms. I can understand why they went with #4, though.

(They could also have spun the old app off as something you must download from the App Store, but I can only imagine the outcry if they'd done that. People freaked out over Youtube, even though the old app was atrocious and there was a far superior replacement available in the App Store.)

Re:Opportunity

[shutdown -p now]

The demands Apple did not want to "give in to" were customer data and privacy demands specified in the Apple TOS. To get Google Maps in the App store, Google had to comply with those standards. So Google did not get everything they wanted. Apple has the features Android had in Google Maps without having to concede on the privacy standards they have set.

Can you be more specific than that? Google has asked for Latitude to be incorporated into Maps. Latitude is a service that tracks your location and stores it on Google servers (so that you can share it with your friends), but it's an opt-in service - it does not track you and send data anywhere unless you explicitly enable it. If Apple privacy policy restricts that kind of thing, then I have to say that it is a very strange policy, indeed (and one wonders how the various apps that record your hiking tracks and publish them online are then consistent with it).

Re:Opportunity

[AmiMoJo]

Google will not be able to keep as under-featured as before.

It wasn't Google keeping you under-featured, it was Apple. Google wanted to add navigation etc. but Apple was insisting that they provide it for free. Now Google has provided it and added the extra branding it wanted.

Re:Opportunity

[_xeno_]

Latitude is a service that tracks your location and stores it on Google servers (so that you can share it with your friends), but it's an opt-in service - it does not track you and send data anywhere unless you explicitly enable it. If Apple privacy policy restricts that kind of thing, then I have to say that it is a very strange policy, indeed (and one wonders how the various apps that record your hiking tracks and publish them online are then consistent with it).

It doesn't. Apple has a competing iOS-only version, so they won't allow Google to compete with them on their own device. Despite the fact that Apple's app is entirely useless for anyone who has friends that haven't drunken the Apple-flavored kool-aid.

Re:Opportunity

[_xeno_]

The demands Apple did not want to "give in to" were customer data and privacy demands specified in the Apple TOS.

Wrong. The demands Apple refused were calling the app "Google Maps" and making the Google logo actually visible on the maps view. Technically it was there in iOS 5, it was just transparent to the point of being as impossible to see as they could get away with.

Apple already tracks their iOS users everywhere they go ("to serve appropriate local ads," you see); it's not like they care about privacy in the slightest.

Re:Opportunity

[AmiMoJo]

Proof? Show me a link to Google/Nokia/Bing maps with satellite imagery of one of these motorways and no accompanying road marked on the schematic map.

Re:Opportunity

[blind biker]

For much the same reason, Apple is clearly moving towards eliminating Samsung components in their hardware.

Ask Macbook users how they feel about those laptops that came with a non-Samsung screen (LG, if I am recalling correctly). The difference in quality is staggering, and everyone who got a Macbook with something else than a Samsung screen is pissed.

If Apple phases out Samsung screens from the iPhone, that will make Apple's product even more of a 2nd class gadget, compared to the Samsung Galaxys.

Re:Opportunity

[Tharkkun]

This, exactly. When people say that they miss the old Maps app, I always wonder if they were using the same app as I was, because the old one was nigh unusable for me. No turn-by-turn, have to have the app open for it to be of any use, poor Siri integration, slow-rendering raster tiles... It just sucked.

So Apple dumps it for a variety of reasons and releases a new app based on their own data. The interface is far superior to the old app, it has vector tiles, turn-by-turn, and Siri integration. The problem? For lots of people, the map data itself isn't as good. Being kicked out forces Google to release their own, competitive app with the previously missing features. Since it will presumably have better map data, or at least POI data, this will force Apple to improve their own product.

This is how the free market is supposed to work. It's unfortunate Apple apparently rushed its inclusion of Maps in iOS 6, but every iOS user today is better off than they were with iOS 5.

There is one thing about this story that is odd, though, and that is that it took Google so long to make an app. The writing was on the wall for quite some time before iOS 6 was announced (let alone released), and yet they still seemed caught flat-footed. Also, I enjoy that everyone who claimed Apple would never allow this app into the store were all proven wrong.

Apple could have had those features for quite some time but refused to license it. Apple makes it seem like Google is the bad guy yet they wanted you to believe their mapping application was using their own data. So all along they were leveraging Google. They switch to their own data because god forbid they place Google logos in a Droid phone. The problem is Apple can't keep up with Google. They leverage their search engine to record and maintain their maps data. Apple would need to license search engine data as well and populate it accurately. That's never going to happen.

Re:Opportunity

[orient]

Google, Apple, Nokia and Bing are not showing one third of the motorways in Romania. I'm not talking about a forgotten secondary road somewhere up in the mountains, I'm talking about (albeit a few) hundreds of kilometers of motorways.

Oh, well, for me Google Maps worked better in Romania (including forgotten little roads in the mountains) than it worked in Regina, Calgary, Edmonton or Toronto.

Re:Opportunity

[Grizzley9]

I would more say this was a win-win for Google. They made demands of Apple, Apple said 'no, we can do this without you', Apple took a huge PR hit for pushing out a sub-par application that did not have Google's data anymore... and now Google has swept in to save the day with their own branded application instead...

Possibly, and I've downloaded it myself, but most users know there are many more Map apps out there, including those with turn by turn and are free if they don't like what the baked in Apple maps gives them (for most it's just fine unless you are a tech blogger). I don't think this is Google sweeping in to "save the day" as much as Google fans would like to believe.

Re:Opportunity

[Solandri]

Even better, with Apple pushing his own map app, Google will not be able to keep as under-featured as before.

That's what I said. But then I was told that Apple was the one who wrote the Google Maps app for iPhone. They merely licensed the rights to use Google's data in their app. Apparently Apple was not willing to pay the extra to license turn by turn navigation. So it was in fact Apple which chose to keep the original app under-featured, not Google.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

By the time Apple maps catches up to being as good or better than Google Maps is right now, they will be so far behind Google maps at that point in time it won't matter. Think about it, when will Apple catch up? A few years maybe, from the looks of what their effort so far has produced. Android has only been out for 4 years, it's arguably surpassed ios already, what will Google have done by the time Apple builds a competitive maps app?

Apple does make more profit than Google. But Google spends money trying out crazy innovative ideas. It lets it's workers spend time working on anything they find interesting for some portion of their time. As a result of this, I don't see any way that Apple can really catch Google in technology.

In short, Apple will probably never catch Google on any technological front because of Google's culture of innovation. Google doesn't spend much of their time talking about and selling what they're doing, they're quietly innovating away on dozens of things at once that the average consumer won't know about until/unless they need it. Look at how big a deal Apple has made of Siri. It's a huge deal to them and Iphone users. Google makes Google Voice, Google Now, and Google Goggles but you'd hardly know it unless you were paying attention. It's just another day at the Google offices. They even name things in a rather utilitarian way. Just Google [indicator of what it does]. The focus really is on the technology.

Good luck from here on out, Apple.

Re:Opportunity

[xaxa]

From when Google Maps launched? I don't care to look.

But the service wasn't instantly good worldwide, and even here in the UK I preferred to use Multimap.co.uk and Streetmap.co.uk for a while, as did many people.

The nearest case now is somewhere like Bosnia; as you can see they only have major roads. Five years ago the country was probably blank, like North Korea is now (although for lack of data, rather than politics).

(Although in the case of Bosnia, if there's a local mapping provider I can't find it with a cursory search.)

Re:Opportunity

[Bill_the_Engineer]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

Why should they do that? My experienced has been that Apple Maps app works better than the Google one. I'm lucky that all my street data is accurate for my region, and the complaints (which seem over sensationalized) concerns data accuracy and not the application itself.

Re:Opportunity

[Culture20]

I think the new interface for both sucks. When I pinch 'n zoom, my fingers drift slightly, so the map always turns, which wastes precious CPU cycles and sometimes confuses me. I wish there was a way to lock the "north is up" setting.

Re:Opportunity

[afidel]

The problem was that the Google renewal came between the iOS 6 and iOS 7 release dates so they had to push up their own maps app to the iOS 6 release.

Re:Opportunity

[mark-t]

Y'know, that's what I find peculiar....

Google wanted to add navigation etc. but Apple was insisting that they provide it for free.

So Google goes ahead and provides it for free.

In what world is this not the very epitome of ironic?

Re:Opportunity

[Sancho]

As Patrick Gibson said,

Google is getting better at design faster than Apple is getting better at web services.

Re:Opportunity

[mark-t]

So, in a nutshell, Google has chosen to offers their own app that does something that Apple would have had to pay Google to get on theirs.

I'm certain that there's a smidgen of logic in this whole thing somewhere, but damned if I know how to find it.

Re:Opportunity

[mjwx]

and now Google has swept in to save the day with their own branded application instead...

But it doesn't ship with the device, so their customers aren't confronted with Google branding, unless and until they choose to download it.

"Confronted" by a little Google logo?

You're quite insecure aren't you.

I dislike Apple as much as the next person with half a brain but I'm certainly not afraid of their logo.

Furthermore, if and when Apple Maps data is improved to be as good or better than Google Maps, people getting new devices won't choose to download Google Maps, as Apple Maps will already be there.

The likilhood of this happening is very, very small. It took Google the better part of a decade to get from where Apple Maps is to where Google maps is today and Google had the talent to do it which Apple doesnt.

Secondly your notion relies on the assumption that Google will not improve their product at the time. This is wrong on so many levels.

It's not just quality data that keeps bringing people back to Google, they also have a lot of very useful applications for that data.

Finally, Apple's mapping data makes so many simple mistakes it's not funny. They haven't even got rectification right.

and Google gets to remind Apple who is more powerful.

Fundamentally it's all about profit, and how to achieve it. And Apple makes about 20 times the profit of Google. Your perception of power is weird, irrelevant and probably mistaken.

Fundamentally it's about getting people to use your product (no customers == no profit). All your statement pointed out is that people buying Apple products are being ripped off for them. Like most apple fanboys you need to somehow justify that you're being ripped off for a good reason. Your perception of power is weird, irrelevant and definitely mistaken.

Re:Opportunity

[mark-t]

The application isn't bad at all. It's still superior to Google's

Uh... yeah, right.

No transit directions.

No terrestrial virtual presence.

Poor direction service when outside of major metropolitan areas.

Google has public transit directions built in, street view, and almost ubiquitous coverage of most developed countries, handling intercity travel just as easily as urban directions.

The so-called advantages that Apple maps has over the old Google maps app, which are voice turn-by-turn navigation and 3d overhead maps are not even available on devices as recent as the iPhone 4, which still supports iOS6 Also, the 3d overhead maps only works in certain selected major cities, where Google's streetview is almost ubiquitous in developed countries, having not only major cities, but also much of the countryside adjacent to highways, as well as every small town I've ever visited.

I'm not an Apple hater, really... but I'm calling this one as I see it. Google really does a better job than Apple at this. Maybe that's only because Google's been doing it longer, and I see no reason that Apple won't improve in the future... maybe someday they'll be on a more even keel, but as things sit, today... and for now... when it comes to maps, Google stomps all over Apple.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

For a better part of that decade google maps couldn't find Pier 39 in San Francisco (BTW where many googlers themselves reside thus should have seen and been chagrinned by) . They have been VERY slow to correct their data. From the reports I have heard Apple corrects their data when reported in about a week. My own reports to google for corrections have taken between 6 weeks and 6 months to be responded to and another few weeks to actually give me the correct results.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny those street view cars (and literally thousands of local employees) didn't get google to stop using an illegal right turn from market onto the central freeway in SF, no it took a user input in September 2012.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

google claimed to have an ios app ready when apple yanked them. Whether or not we believe them is something we have to decide

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

People now see through Apple's glitter and realize they are just a company playing catch up with their competitors and are not really the innovators they make themselves appear to be.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

Google, Apple, Nokia and Bing are not showing one third of the motorways in Romania. I'm not talking about a forgotten secondary road somewhere up in the mountains, I'm talking about (albeit a few) hundreds of kilometers of motorways.

Lately I've noticed google is improving in this area but... source of data for some roads they add is in fact OSM. I put a lot of secondary roads in an area of the country in OSM and in 2-3 wks time they appeared on Google too. Did the same for another region - 3-4 weeks later appeared also in Google Maps and switching back and forth on wikimapia between google layer and osm layer shows the new roads in google exactly the way I put them in OSM... next time I'll surely include a series of hairpins that doesn't exist to test.

Re:Opportunity

[BasilBrush]

"Confronted" by a little Google logo?
You're quite insecure aren't you.

I know Apple's design standards. For example, unlike the piece of shit PC you bought, a Mac doesn't come with "Intel Inside" stickers, or the rest of the stickers, nor is it loaded up with crapware.

Apple has standards. You don't.

I dislike Apple as much as the next person

And your hatred is why your posts are so irrational.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

In other news a new Apple update integrates app that shits on its users. After some initial discomfort users are now nearly universally happy, with some writing long columns explaining why it is necessary and a good outcome for everyone concerned.

Re:Opportunity

[Triklyn]

cost is not always financial. a google mapping app probably generates revenue in some convoluted way that doesn't end up costing the end user any money. doesn't mean it's free.

How long

[Andy Prough]

until this is the most-downloaded app in the store? One day? A few hours?

Re:How long

[girlintraining]

until this is the most-downloaded app in the store? One day? A few hours?

Try "the moment it showed up." It hasn't even been available for 8 hours yet and it already has tens of thousands of downloads. People haven't even gotten out of bed yet, and it's the most downloaded app of the day.

Re:How long

[BasilBrush]

Interestingly it's not even in the top 10 on the UK App Store.

Perhaps they are only recalculated periodically and it hasn't kicked in yet.

Either than, or other people in the UK have as good an experience of Apple Maps as I have. I couldn't find a single error around my area.

The former is probably more likely than the latter though.

Re:How long

[NatasRevol]

Tens of thousands!!!!

Let us know when it gets to 1% of iOS users.

Re:How long

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, not in the top ten in the US App Store

http://www.apple.com/itunes/charts/free-apps/

Re:How long

[shutdown -p now]

Right now it has 10k ratings. How many downloads is anyone's guess.

Re:How long

[Anonymous Coward]

That page is not updated as often as within an iDevice. Looking at the listings from my iPod, it is currently #1 in the US.

Re:How long

[feandil]

definitely top here in canada. I live in Montreal and apple maps is unable to find Rue St Catherine, it's just the biggest shopping street in the city, and apple maps direct you to cleveland or somewhere....
I'll finally be able to update to iOS 6 :)

Live traffic data.

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do these folks get live traffic data?

And not just this app, but everyone else: TomTom, Garmin, etc ....

I have a GPS with traffic, and I don't see how they're getting the data from me or anyone else with these things.

Re:Live traffic data.

[mungtor]

That's part of the EULA and the "anonymous statistics" I believe. When you use Google Maps it uploads your position periodically, from which it can deduce your average velocity. It correlates that with other reports from other users in geographically similar areas and creates congestion maps.

I don't think stand-alone GPS (like Garmin) upload any data, so they probably purchase it from Google. That's most likely why it's a subscription or ad-based service on those devices.

Re:Live traffic data.

[TheSpoom]

Can you cite this? I didn't realize that Google was (apparently) literally tracking my movements every time I used Navigation.

Re:Live traffic data.

[alen]

apple maps, google and waze keep track of your speed and location. along with others using the apps. 10mph on a 60mph highway means traffic

Re:Live traffic data.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's part of the EULA and the "anonymous statistics" I believe. When you use Google Maps it uploads your position periodically, from which it can deduce your average velocity. It correlates that with other reports from other users in geographically similar areas and creates congestion maps.

I don't think stand-alone GPS (like Garmin) upload any data, so they probably purchase it from Google. That's most likely why it's a subscription or ad-based service on those devices.

Standalone navigation units usually use something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_message_channel to get traffic data. I know mine does, including TMC pro.

Re:Live traffic data.

[mungtor]

In the Google Privacy Policy on my phone, in the Service section it says:

"Location information
When you use a location-enabled Google service,we may collect and process information about your actual location,like GPS signals sent by a mobile device. We may also use various technologies to determine location,such as sensor data from your device that may,for example,provide information on nearby Wi-Fi access points and cell towers."

That's one of the things I'm assuming they're using it for.

Re:Live traffic data.

[Cigarra]

http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2009/08/bright-side-of-sitting-in-traffic.html

Re:Live traffic data.

[Mushdot]

I've been told two things, neither of which may be true, but 1) seems the most likely:

1. TomTom Traffic and others have a 3G connection. They talk to the local mobile masts and Tom Tom can use the location data to estimate traffic volume.

2. TomTom buys mobile phone location data from mobile phone companies to estimate congestion based on the number of phones moving between base stations.

Re:Live traffic data.

[AvitarX]

Pretty sure it's there the first time you use location, and use maps.

Been a while since I activated a phone, but it was quite shoved in my face from memory.

If you turn on keep a travel log or whatnot, then I assume it's one maps or no. Otherwise I have assumed only when maps.

Also, lots of cities have traffic cams now, so I assume that info can be subscribed to (trafax for example used to sell to radio stations). Believe it or not, traffic data was available before smartphones, I bet Google could scrape sites and use it quite competently, I mean they get weather data, right?

Re:Live traffic data.

[localman57]

Can you cite this? I didn't realize that Google was (apparently) literally tracking my movements every time I used Navigation.

Mark Zuckerberg just called. He said he'd really, really like it if you personally would sign up for a Facebook account.

Re:Live traffic data.

[Simon Brooke]

That's part of the EULA and the "anonymous statistics" I believe. When you use Google Maps it uploads your position periodically, from which it can deduce your average velocity. It correlates that with other reports from other users in geographically similar areas and creates congestion maps.

I don't think stand-alone GPS (like Garmin) upload any data, so they probably purchase it from Google. That's most likely why it's a subscription or ad-based service on those devices.

I know a bit about Tom Tom side of this. In the UK, at least as of five years ago, Tom Tom were buying from the mobile phone carriers data on what handsets are connected to which cell towers in real time. They were then mapping the time it took for handsets to pass from one tower to another along the line of a road, and from that inferring speed of traffic/congestion on that road.

As I say, I know that they were doing this in the UK five years ago, and that it was then a new service under very active development. I do not know whether they are still doing this, or whether they ever were doing this in other territories, but I would expect so.

Re:Live traffic data.

[suutar]

when I downloaded and fired up Google Maps 20 minutes ago, the second thing I saw was "Help us improve Google, including traffic and other services. Anonymous location data will be collected by Google's location service and sent to Google, and may be stored on your device. Learn more." (The first was just the logo splash.)

Re:Live traffic data.

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't realize that the app that calls out to a server saying it needs the maps around your current position in order to tell you exactly where you are could possibly be divulging that position to the server that gives it the maps?

It might not even be possible for them to not track your movements depending how they implemented the algorithm that decides what maps to send back to the app.

Re:Live traffic data.

[BasilBrush]

And that's one of the reasons Apple didn't accept Googles terms in the negotiation to renew the build-in Google Maps app. Why the hell would Apple want such a dialog on a built in app.

Vector rendered maps carry less information

[Anonymous Coward]

Its a good thing iOS has Google great map content back! However, the vector based rendering seems to have problems putting the same amount of information on the screen as the tile bases maps did.

Another thing I have noticed so far: If you do a routing right after a search (using the button in the bottom corner), the route is not shown on the map, all you get is the list view of the route. Weird.

But its so good to see even map competition on iOS, if someone could only show me a great OpenStreetMap based app...

Re:Vector rendered maps carry less information

[alen]

really?

iOS has Waze and 20 other free and paid maps apps. had them for years. iOS even has true offline maps apps and not the hacked up offline that google maps has.

if i'm going to drive somewhere with weak or no signal i'll just install my Navigon again, download the states i need and go.

Apple Maps

[girlintraining]

Yeah. Apparently Apple has finally figured out that killing your customers isn't good business. /snark This is the first time Apple has had to swallow its pride and admit that something they made failed so disasterously that even the Reality Distortion Field created by thousands of spin doctors and lawyers collapsed. They'll probably fix that problem though when they switch to 16nm fabrication though for their chip plants. Battery life and minaturization of lawyers has always been a major shortcoming of their product line.

Re:Apple Maps

[stranger_to_himself]

Yeah. Apparently Apple has finally figured out that killing your customers isn't good business. /snark =

Works out pretty well for the tobacco industry.

Re:Apple Maps

[girlintraining]

Works out pretty well for the tobacco industry.

Tobacco takes 30 years to kill people. Apple's product takes mere hours.

Re:Apple Maps

[BasilBrush]

This is the first time Apple has had to swallow its pride and admit that something they made failed

You're some way out of date with the news. Tim Cook sent out the letter admitting their mistakes with Apple Maps back on the 28th September, a mere 11 days after Apple Maps was released.

And contrary to your claim, it's not the first time Apple have admitted their mistakes. For example Steve Jobs admitted they messed up with the launch of MobileMe.

It's not that Apple don't admit their mistakes when they make them. It's that they don't often make serious mistakes.

Re:Apple Maps

[CodeheadUK]

Works out pretty well for the tobacco industry.

Tobacco takes 30 years to kill people. Apple's product takes mere hours.

Therefore it must be an improved product. This changes everything.

Re:Apple Maps

[jo_ham]

Battery life? Compared to what?

I have a 4 that I use all day, every day and I charge it every other day. My friend brings her charger to the lab with her because her SII needs to be topped up during the day. Maybe the SIII is better, but she is not the only one I've heard complain about battery life.

I can't say it's ever been an issue on any iPhone I've used. She loves the SII (it's her second one after her first one was stolen), but she is considering swapping for something else so she doesn't have to carry her charger with her everywhere.

Also not the first time Apple has had to swallow it's pride and admit failure - MobileMe was a pretty big and public one (from Steve himself during a keynote, no less) among others.

Re:Apple Maps

[dkf]

Battery life? Compared to what?

Compared to a desktop corporate lawyer, of course, which requires a constant supply of money and regular recharging with leather upholstery.

Re:Apple Maps

[mjwx]

Yeah. Apparently Apple has finally figured out that killing your customers isn't good business. /snark =

Works out pretty well for the tobacco industry.

Thats because making it hard for customers to stop using your product is good for business.

Something Apple did learn from the tobacco industry.

WTF were they thinking?!

[slashmydots]

Seriously, what were they thinking? Everyone had a solid, universal reason to not buy an iPhone 5 and Google, maker of Android, ruined it. Is a couple thousand dollars in app money really worth failing to crush Apple even worse? Well, regardless, Apple has less than a year left on their lease their maps database and interface. I don't know if a 3rd party app like this counts or not but regardless, this is beyond stupid. I bet their contract didn't say they had to design an entirely new app for them. I certainly would have left them hanging. That or made a total troll map app where the third direction is always "Lol @ Apple, we're only getting you this far. Try Apple maps for the rest of the directions. Try not to drive off a cliff into the ocean."

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[somersault]

From what I've read before, the previous Apple Maps app was also made by Apple, just using the Google API. The new app is all Google. I don't think Google really cares about iPhones and iPads. iPhone and iPad users still use Google services and see Google ads.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

The goal of Android, for Google, is to have people using Google's services.

What would worry Google more than people using iPhone over Android, is people using Apple Maps over Google Maps.

My guess is that they held off the release as long as they could, with the risk of Apple releasing updates that brought their maps into a "good enough" state that would make it hard to move iPhone users to Google maps. Releasing it just after a big news story about Apple maps getting people lost, is pretty good timing. Getting people to switch, and leaving a bad taste in their mouth, is a pretty good way to keep Apple's maps saddled with a poor reputation.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[brian_tanner]

Probably they were thinking carefully with a room full of smart people considering more than short term one-upmanship on their mobile platform. Google is not Android, it's much bigger than that. They have to fiercely defend their reputation for playing nice on many/all platforms, because many of us started using their service for that very reason. Google is supposed to be better than petty BS, they are supposed to be that more-agnostic omnipresent service that is available everywhere. IMHO anyway.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[L4t3r4lu5]

Apple fans would still buy the iPhone X if the staff spat in your face when you walked into the store. Google are just increasing their market and exposure, like any good company would.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[IndustrialComplex]

Momentum.

What good is convincing a very small sliver of people to come to Android if the end result is that everyone else who doesn't starts getting used to an alternate product?

Consider it like a gateway drug. In the case of Google, they already own the market (with regard to email, maps, etc) They don't want people to get used to using alternate products.

It isn't even 'evil' per say, in any business, you always want people seeing, using, remembering, and promoting your brand. At least with Google, we reap the benefit in a true competitive situation since Google MUST put out a better product. Could you imagine what would happen if the Apple Maps was a better product than Google's? Habits are formed, and people don't think about Google when running their maps/searches/etc.

If Google tried to win this by restricting their services to people only using Android, they would have never have reached the position they are currently in. On the internet, loyalty can be extremely ephemeral.

Why do I use google services? Because they work better for me than Yahoo. Do you know how hard it would be to switch to another service provider for email/maps/search?

Email I can just setup an autoresponder (added bonus that spambots don't pick up my new address and are left behind.) Maps? Simple as typing a new address. Search? Just as simple.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason is that on mobile devices the maps are becoming the gateway for advertising, sort of like the google.com for your phone. Traditional browser advertising doesn't really work on mobile devices but you can expect location based ads to become more and prevalent. For example, the maps let you find out things like where the nearest Starbucks is or the closest hardware store. If Apple can fulfill queries like these without going through Google search then Google is set to lose a huge amount of revenue. Why they ever let Apple get to the point where they built their own maps is just mind boggling! Android may be growing but there are still hundreds of millions of iOS devices out there and they can't ignore that market. That's why they had to release their own map application. I am really surprised that Apple approved the app though. The good news though is that all this competition should lead to better maps all around.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is expected to sell 45 million iPhone 5 in Q4 this year. I don't think the apple maps app is turning very many people off the phone.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Bigby]

Mod Up! Google had to time this perfectly. If they wait too long, Apple will have a Maps product that is sufficient. Right now, they have Apple against the wall. Google can then get their primary ad generating services on the iPhone, puts their main money maker on almost all smartphones.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[slashmydots]

While that is true, Apple's contact with Google was up in like 9 months or something and the lease was created before Google even made Android, or at least close to it. Now that they're outselling iOS devices, I'd say put up a counter that says "countdown to screwed" and watch Apple scramble and fail to fix their own app in time. I think whoever is running Apple is a bit too cheap. If you say "well, we could pay 5x more to lease Garmin's actually good database....screw it, TomTom's is cheaper! Let's buy it!" when you have like $25 billion in liquid cash, that seems stupid to me.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[slashmydots]

Google didn't get to where they are by saying "Meh, good enough" just because they own the majority of the market. Like when they were 90% of all internet searches, they still took Ask and Bing and Yahoo seriously to keep them down. Now, outselling iOS devices 3:1, they can't just say "well, good enough. Let everyone buy a couple more iPhones." I'd be more like "KILL APPLE! KICK THEM WHEN THEY'RE DOWN!" so that they can never recover.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[shellbeach]

Remember that Android is just a defensive moat around Google's search empire, and Google maps is another. Google would love you to use Android, where they have more control, but what they really don't want to do is lose customers on another major platform. This way they caused maximum damage to the iPhone5 launch and the Apple brand (especially the "Apple does everything best" mentality) but probably won't lose too many users.

Nevertheless, I'm sure they'd have much rather been the default Apple mapping software on iOS, rather than have gone down this route. That they've come out OK in the end is more due to Apple's incompetence than any Googlian master stroke ...

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[ceoyoyo]

Reasons why Google did this:
(1) People were buying iPhone 5s in droves despite the silly anti-hype.

(2) Google doesn't care who buys what phone, so long as they all send their data to Google. Google doesn't make anything on Android (it costs them a lot to develop and maintain it). Google makes a LOT of money on harvesting your information. Now they've got millions of iPhone users giving them location information and using them for geographic search again.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[BasilBrush]

Garmin don't have their own data. They license it from Navteq... which is a Nokia subsidiary.

Apple licensing it would mean moving from depending on one smartphone competitor to depending on another.

When you think Apple is being stupid, more often than not it's because you don't know what Apple knows.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[BasilBrush]

Google didn't get to where they are by saying "Meh, good enough"

Their years long "beta" label on many of their web services suggests that that's very much what they did.

I'd be more like "KILL APPLE! KICK THEM WHEN THEY'RE DOWN!" so that they can never recover.

Get back to us when you're CEO of a successful company, rather than a school bully.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[slashmydots]

I'm the owner of a computer repair company and head IT manager at another part time. I go after my competition relentlessly because that's what companies do. I know I'm better than them so I try to make them go away but underpricing them, advertising in the same media they do, and highlighting their "shining" reviews from their customers. Anyone found to be making tons of money splitting Office licenses and installing fake Photoshop copies gets a visit from the BSA and sued out of existence. If they dropped something in my lap the caliber of screwing up a major feature of their product, woooo, it's my birthday because they just made my job easier. To compare, "I don't care, we're already big enough" was Geek Squad 5 years ago. Now how are they doing?

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

... except apple is still making record profits, making way more money than google or most other companies on the planet, and consistently sells out its entire stock of phones. not sure what apple could possibly need to "recover" from. some bad PR for a couple months? so what; that doesn't seem to affect their bottom line at all.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[somersault]

Still, it seems like they were pretty stupid to rush out the app as soon as they did.. I don't get it. Google haven't shown any propensity for screwing their partners over so far.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re read my post again, and try to understand it this time.

Google's products are *maps* (and other services). Android is just a vehicle for them to get you to use those products.

Of course they are trying to make Android better and take over from Apple. Because that helps them to get people to use their products.

But they are much more concerned with competition with maps from Apple, than they are with competition with Android from iPhones running google services.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[BasilBrush]

I'm the owner of a computer repair company and head IT manager at another part time.

Part time self employed is not CEO of a company, let alone a successful one.

But I suspect even "self employed" is overreaching. I suspect I'd be guessing right if I said that you occasionally charge people for sorting out their tech problems. And the taxman doesn't get to hear about it because it's in cash. And lets face it, it's chump change - there's no shortage of moonlighting computer fixers.

But if it's more than that, I apologise. It's still not running a real company. Or you wouldn't be doing something else part time.

Re:WTF were they thinking?!

[Anonymous Coward]

And as an iPhone user since the 3G (the 2.5 was shit). I can honestly say I would still buy their damn devices. I fuck with technology all day that won't work right. When I'm done with work for the day, I'm done fixing fragmented, buggy shit. It's why my Nook Color gets next to no attention. It was fun hacking it, and playing with it, but it's too much damn trouble. Plus the few times I have caused physical damage, parts are WAY easier to find for a phone model more people have.

How much data does it use?

[hackertourist]

When I see mapping applications on a mobile phone I always wonder how much it costs when you use it on a regular basis.

My 2003 Palm TX has most of Europe stored on a 1GB SD card so it'll work without a data connection, but I see Google Maps will download the required data every time.

Re:How much data does it use?

[nogginthenog]

Google maps on Android can download map data for offline use. No idea about the iPhone version.

Re:How much data does it use?

[hackertourist]

Yes, but from the Google Maps FAQ:

Features that require a network connection - such as directions and Navigation - aren't available offline.

So how useful are offline maps if you can't use them for navigation?

What I want is to avoid paying a fortune in roaming charges when I'm on vacation across Europe.

Re:How much data does it use?

[admdrew]

What I want is to avoid paying a fortune in roaming charges when I'm on vacation across Europe.

Not sure what your phone situation is, but I got around swimmingly (mostly northern Europe) on an HTC G2 (quad-band GSM) with a T-Mobile SIM I purchased in Warsaw, like $30 for 2GB of data. GPS + Google Maps was definitely a game-changer for me.

Re:How much data does it use?

[shutdown -p now]

If you absolutely need maps with offline navigation on a smartphone, the only manufacturer that's offering anything like that right now (and for the last several years) is Nokia. But then your choices are basically limited to Symbian or Windows Phone...

Google probably makes more ad money

[Andy Prough]

per iPhone than per Android phone. Why WOULDN'T they want more iPhones to be sold?

Re:Google probably makes more ad money

[slashmydots]

Because once your competition is gone, you can spike up the price through the roof.

Google are much more than just Android

[accessbob]

They've more than made their point, there is nothing to be gained from losing all brand visibility on one of the most important mobile product ranges.

Brand visibility matters.

Re:Google are much more than just Android

[slashmydots]

They outsell Apple 3:1 with Android phones. I don't think visibility is a problem. For people who don't know that Google owns Android, they've at least heard of Google. Regardless though, making Apple's products look bad is key. Like for Windows 8, someone wrote a gadget for a start menu and with it installed, it makes Microsoft look better and some users are none of the wiser. So that'd be like Apple writing a Windows 8 start menu app for them if Apple had 75% of the PC market, lol.

Re:Google are much more than just Android

[shellbeach]

Google doesn't outsell Apple 3:1 -- Google is barely involved in hardware at all. And the Android OS itself they give away for free.

Re:Google are much more than just Android

[slashmydots]

Now they're trying to buy hardware manufacturers, release their own tablets and phones, they already make a commission on app sales, etc. You build up a brand and steal territory from your competition first then start charging more and more over time for various things once you've taken enough of a market share from that. You have to do it this way with a lot of corporate money backing it because actual, traditional start ups are basically impossible in the mobile device world.

Re:Google are much more than just Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the profitable customers are on iOS, and it is only a matter of time before Apple's maps are brought up to scratch. I doubt Google gains much by waiting longer. And it isn't as if Google Maps was the only killer feature Android had over iOS.

Re:Google are much more than just Android

[shellbeach]

I think you're missing the point of Android -- it's almost certainly not a profit-making exercise. It'd be a bit difficult to suddenly start charging heaps for it, too, since it's open source and there are some huge development communities actively working on AOSP (the Cyanogenmod group being one, AOKP being another ...)

Rather, the argument goes that Android is a moat protecting Google's search castle. The revenue Google gets from its search advertising far outweighs anything else, and they want to keep their stranglehold of the market with as many different strategies as possible (G+ is another moat in this paradigm).

Google's recent ventures into hardware have been primarily aimed at kickstarting the languishing Android tablet market -- with their most recent Nexus phone, the Nexus 4, they were so unprepared for any popular demand that the thing sold out in 15 minutes around the world.

This took too long

[Anonymous Coward]

I am now a faithful Waze user. I can contribute by editing, or alerting people to road problems and speed traps. I can have meaningless traffic conversations with people nearby. It's just easier to feel a part of something.

The only reason to use the Google maps app is when it was automatically launched when another program asked for location. Google is now just another third party app like everyone else.

They had to...

[Ronin Developer]

In the interests of public safety, Apple really had to approve this app.

GPS Navigation tools frequently have outdated maps which can lead us astray. And, there is always a horror story of someone getting lost in the desert beause they followed their GPS. Google, if I recall correctly, was sued by a woman when their maps told her to take a pedestrian route that didn't have sidewalks and she was hit by a car.

At the very least, Apple can now deflect such litigeous action to Google. And, by approving it, it shows they "care".

Re:They had to...

[Mephistophocles]

Google, if I recall correctly, was sued by a woman when their maps told her to take a pedestrian route that didn't have sidewalks and she was hit by a car.

Ok. I just can't resist this anymore. Who, in the bloody hell, is so stupid that they follow their stupid GPS device around like a damn lemming - so the extent that they walk in the middle of the damn street and get their ass plastered by oncoming traffic? What a really top-notch example of natural selection - follow that up with the fact that she sued Google for her own stupidity, and I'm having real trouble feeling any sympathy.

Come on, people - GPS is a tool to help you get your general bearings in unknown territory; always has been, always will be. It won't ever be perfect and it doesn't have to be. Computers cannot (and should not) think for you.

Re:They had to...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny that it wasn't until late 2009 that google allowed user input on bad directions
http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/maps/ViCkX3jv3XI

Re:They had to...

[jo_ham]

Google, if I recall correctly, was sued by a woman when their maps told her to take a pedestrian route that didn't have sidewalks and she was hit by a car.

Ok. I just can't resist this anymore. Who, in the bloody hell, is so stupid that they follow their stupid GPS device around like a damn lemming - so the extent that they walk in the middle of the damn street and get their ass plastered by oncoming traffic? What a really top-notch example of natural selection - follow that up with the fact that she sued Google for her own stupidity, and I'm having real trouble feeling any sympathy.

Come on, people - GPS is a tool to help you get your general bearings in unknown territory; always has been, always will be. It won't ever be perfect and it doesn't have to be. Computers cannot (and should not) think for you.

Unfortunately, lots of people.

There are countless photos of signs people have put up along very-obviously-not proper roads with words like "turn around, trust us, your sat nav is wrong" halfway along single track bridleways, or at the edge of concrete banks that lead into a canal etc.

Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Andy Prough]

"I almost died in Australia, thank god this is out." - 5 stars from Reed Morse

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Plumpaquatsch]

"I almost died in Australia, thank god this is out." - 5 stars from Reed Morse

Australian Police warn of safety concerns from Google Maps

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Andy Prough]

I saw that - gmaps sending people head-on into oncoming traffic - more dangerous than being led into a desert!

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Anonymous Coward]

No. If you don't know where you are going and a GPS (any GPS) tells you to head into oncoming traffic then you are an idiot. If you don't know where you are going and a GPS gives you valid directions to the middle of a desert, well then you are pretty much eff'd.

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Anonymous Coward]

Translated: Google's fuck-up is OK, Apple's is not. Slashdot double-standard wins again!

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Andy Prough]

No - sending people to their possible death into oncoming traffic is going to create negligent liability, no matter what your fan-boyism. I use an Android phone and I like it, but I'm not stupid enough to defend this type of activity.

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[thoughtlover]

Exactly what I thought! It only took a warning from the Australian Police to NOT use Apple's maps to get Google's version fast-tracked to the App Store. Not only was it the top "Featured" app, but probably debuted at #1 in "Top 25".

Re:Hahaha - check out this funny review on iTunes

[Plumpaquatsch]

Care to read TFA I linked to?

I just personally can not stand iApple

[Anonymous Coward]

"... to help developers use Google Maps when building their beautiful and innovative apps."

*bleargh*

Re:I just personally can not stand iApple

[Tarlus]

Except that Apple didn't say that.

Dangerous app...

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Maps Leads Australian Drivers Down Dangerous One Way Road

Based on how widely stories of dangerously erroneous Australian data in other, unnamed mapping applications were reported, I expect this story will be widely publicized soon.

Re:Dangerous app...

[Andy Prough]

Good point. TFA says gmaps are sending people the wrong way into oncoming traffic in Australia. Probably more dangerous than being led into a desert.

Re:Dangerous app...

[pbjones]

this is because the roads are surveyed but the actual condition of the road may vary from track (in this case) to highway. I know a couple of places where the same issue exists in google maps. Google is/was using some crappy arial views while the Apple map tried a little harder, (look up the town of Boorowa, Australia)

Wonder if they'll update for 1st iPad ...

[gstoddart]

I wonder if this means an update to the Google map application which came with the original iPad.

Since the iOS 6 doesn't support that, those devices never lost the original Google app.

Of course, that doesn't help the fact that you won't be getting any real OS updates anymore.

Re:Wonder if they'll update for 1st iPad ...

[Goldenhawk]

"Original iPad"? This app still doesn't support *ANY* iPad directly. It's an iPhone-native app, that can be 2x scaled to show on the iPad also. Looks horrible at full size.

Okay, I get it - Google wanted to get *something* out there as quickly as possible. But it cannot be THAT hard to set up a native iPad resolution - it's just a bigger screen. Come on already, Google. Finish the job quickly, please.

I'm really happy this is out, as it proves Apple is willing to allow Google to create a new iOS mapping app that directly competes with their own. But I'll be a lot happier when it also looks good on my iPad.

Re:Wonder if they'll update for 1st iPad ...

[Tridus]

Google's apps always follow this pattern. The first g+ app was iPhone only. The first Youtube app not bundled in iOS was iPhone only. Both of them got iPad support in the next version.

There's no doubt that Maps will get the same treatment, but they want to get it out there and working first.

Re:Wonder if they'll update for 1st iPad ...

[Anonymous Coward]

...But it cannot be THAT hard to set up a native iPad resolution - it's just a bigger screen. Come on already, Google. Finish the job quickly, please.

As a small-time mobile app developer, I must chime in and say that developing an app that truly takes advantage of the iPad's screen real estate and "looks good" takes a great deal of effort. It is NOT simply a matter of scale.

My local newspaper's app, for example, has the same content on both the phone and tablet versions - but it is organized differently and each has slightly different graphical features for things like menu navigation.

Have a look:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-blade-for-ipad-and-iphone/id425218323?mt=8

I've seen this before.

[RivenAleem]

BARON
        iOS, iOS... I place you in charge
        of Maps. It's yours to squeeze, as I
        promised. I want you to squeeze and
        squeeze and squeeze.
                (massaging in rhythm)
        Give me spice! Drive them into utter
        submission. You must not show the
        slightest pity or mercy... as only you
        can... Never stop!
                (releasing him)
        Go.... Show no mercy!

                iOS
        Yes, my lord Baron.

iOS leaves just as Google steps out of the shower.
The Baron turns to him lovingly.
--
                        BARON
                (to Google)
        And when we've crushed these people enough
        I'll send in you Google... they'll cheer you
        as a rescuer... lovely Google... really a
        lovely boy.
                (suddenly he smiles and screams)
        Where's my doctor?

Sandy Island

[troon]

...is still there as a white blob at various scales between Australia & New Caledonia...

Maps was always an Apple app

[Comboman]

P.S.: Have you noticed how Google managed to come up with a decent Maps app in only 6 months? They completely neglected the iOS distributed app for years and only improved on Android until Apple kicked their arse back to work.

The iPhone "Maps" app has always been an Apple developed product which is part of the iOS core, Google only provided the map data via a licensing agreement. The big sticking point on renewing the licensing agreement was not (as many people think) either cost or exclusive features (like turn-by-turn); it was branding. Google wanted it's name and logo clearly shown on the app ("Google Maps", not "Maps"). but Apple refused (and would not approve a separate iOS Google Maps app since that would "duplicate" core OS functionality). Now, not only does Google get to be the hero by rescuing iOS users from failed Apple Maps, it gets to control the branding on its iOS maps app.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[BasilBrush]

The big sticking point on renewing the licensing agreement was not (as many people think) either cost or exclusive features (like turn-by-turn); it was branding.

All three of those are issues, and there are others such as Google wanting location data from users. You are not in a position to say which were the crucial issues in the company negotiations. They were not public. You're just going on media and blog speculation.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[hcs_$reboot]

Google included the map turn / tilt that was added to Apple Maps initially. Am I the only one being driven crazy by this feature that cannot be turned off? Just by zooming + or - with two fingers while turning a bit (which happens often and I've no Alzheimer), the top is no longer North oriented... highly annoying.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[Anonymous Coward]

" Google wanting location data from users"

From everything I've read this was as an off-by-default opt-in, which seems pretty reasonable. Only people who went out of their way to turn it on would ever say.

"You are not in a position to say which were the crucial issues"

I would suggest you open the mirror app.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[Clockwurk]

If you click/tap on the compass arrow, it will re-orient.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[hcs_$reboot]

Yeah I know that - but needs to do that all the time is annoying.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[Anonymous Coward]

not only does Google get to be the hero by rescuing iOS users from failed Apple Maps

What a fucking tool you are.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[shutdown -p now]

Google had this feature for a long time in its Android maps app, by the way - ever since that one switched to vector graphics.

Re:Maps was always an Apple app

[SilverJets]

You must be accidentally hitting it every time you pinch to zoom in or something. It isn't always on for me and zooming in and out while turning (either the phone in my hand or my whole body) doesn't turn it on. I have to actually hit the arrow icon in the bottom left corner to turn it on and off.

FINALLY???

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally? Really? The title is pretty biased.

What happened to the conspiracy theories that Apple was holding the app hostage and wouldn't approve it even when Google said it hadn't been submitted? Where are those people admitting they were wrong? They've moved on to the next anti-Apple trolling meme like people 'dying' in Australia because the maps were so bad.

Google maps getting a similar warning in another part of Australia? *crickets*

iPhone size

[amunter]

The posting mentions this, but the app is designed for iPhone displays, not iPad. So you have to do the terrible zoom to get it to not be tiny on your iPad.

Re:iPhone size

[jo_ham]

Google have said an iPad version is also in the works.

5th out of 333 in App Store

[TheNinjaroach]

Searched for "Google Maps" in the app store and it came up 5th in the search results. Now they just need to implement Google Search in the store and we'll be set.

Re:5th out of 333 in App Store

[jo_ham]

Came up first for me. YMMV.

Since when is this the first time?

[junkgoof]

Hmm, the Apple 3, the Lisa (debatable), the Newton, initial iCloud release, near irrelevance before Jobs came back... I'm sure there are others. I expect them to be more frequent now that Steve Jobs is not around to flip out and shred poor designs and implementations. It is definitely not the first major Apple flameout.

I have an iphone and I like my iphone but I expect my next phone to be an android both because rooted linux should improve and because Apple will go downhill without Jobs (great designer, great QA, lousy manager; too bad mediocre managers are using his autobio to control freak for mediocrity).

Apple maps obsolete forever

[wardk]

Apple should give up and just pay google. their effort sucked, their product is utter shit, and their credibility is shot because of this idiocy.

of course, you cannot delete the apple maps abomination, the best you can do it stuff it into a folder where you don't have to look at anymore.

never thought I would need a folder named "Shit Apps" on such a nice device, but there it is.

nice work google, and thanks.

Re:Apple maps obsolete forever

[suutar]

I just have a separate page, way in the back. It has has apple maps and passbook.

Re:Apple maps obsolete forever

[nitio]

wait wut? I have a folder called "Fuck It" since my first iPhone and everytime I go the jailbreak road I hide those apps (though I'd like to send them to oblivion).

PS: apps in that folder: Mail; Stocks; Game Center; Recorder; Contacts; Compass; Passbook; Reminders

Re:Apple maps obsolete forever

[Anonymous Coward]

Why pay google when google are doing it for free?

I'm happy

[DaMattster]

I was just about to ditch my iPhone for an Android due primarily to the terrible Apple Maps app. I only like the iPhone for the accuracy of its on screen keyboard. Otherwise, I prefer Android.

Re:I'm happy

[admdrew]

I suppose offtopic for this specific story, but have you tried SwiftKey on Android? I've definitely found it to be the best keyboard in terms of accuracy, and it seems about as good as the iPhone keyboard (in my limited experience typing on friends' iPhones).

ad revenue

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume most folks will opt for Google maps, and therefore Google can charge more for ads which is the name of the game.

Yay, I'll exist again

[Tridus]

According to Apple Maps, my neighborhood doesn't exist at all. It's also got some ugly, low resolution greyscale (!) imagery for the area that is hopelessly out of date.

Google Maps on the other hand actually knows about my area, and has high resolution color imagery.

The gap in data quality between the two is enormous.

Re:Yay, I'll exist again

[Anonymous Coward]

You know you're an Apple fan when you'd rather not exist than switch to Android.

Re:Yay, I'll exist again

[Tridus]

Or you're a person on a lengthy phone contract and can't really do much about it without paying quite a lot of money.

Which is quite common in Canada. But hey, having your head up your ass is fine too.

No support for contacts!?

[Chris Pimlott]

While I'm extremely glad to have Google Transit directions back, I'm honestly shocked at the lack of integration with iOS contacts. Typing in your friend's name for directions to their place is a pretty basic use case.

Re:No support for contacts!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Google transit is back? Not in St Louis: "public transit information not available in this region". However, I get fine public transit information from the free "Transit" app which integrates pretty well with Apple maps. Methinks google is the one shooting themselves int the foot...

Re:No support for contacts!?

[Chris Pimlott]

Och, that's too bad, transit directions are working in Chicago at least.

Re:No support for contacts!?

[Drophet]

If you don't know where your "friends" live... maybe they want it that way ;)

Re:No support for contacts!?

[Anonymous Coward]

While I'm extremely glad to have Google Transit directions back, I'm honestly shocked at the lack of integration with iOS contacts. Typing in your friend's name for directions to their place is a pretty basic use case.

Amen!

Re:LOL

[Jafafa Hots]

Gypsies at a bargain?

That IS tempting!

Has its own errors

[markdj]

Already found two point of interest location errors and reported them!

More revisionism

[Anonymous Coward]

Google doesn't want location data from users UNLESS THEY OPT IN.

Apple didn't even want to let the users have a choice.

You are not in a position to declare someone has a valid position or not on this subject since you're either woefully misinformed or lying.

Re:More revisionism

[donny77]

Violates the TOS and Privacy Policy Apple has in place. Do you make exceptions? Then why do you have the policy. It does matter as once you allow exceptions the policy becomes impossible to enforce. Maybe Google has a nice informative opt in screen. Maybe someone else puts a hot corner in their app and no documentation and if you hit that corner you've opted in to privacy policy violations. How to you differentiate the two?

Not available everywhere... #fail

[Kergan]

Wtf, Google? Why isn't this available in every iTunes store?

Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[Guspaz]

Apple maps is missing transit directions, streetview, most information, and has inaccurate destinations, but turn-by-turn actually does work pretty well. I was particularly happy with how it works when it has no internet connection.

I took a trip to the US not long ago, and my data plan stops working when I cross the border. However, it turns out that Apple Maps will continue providing turn-by-turn directions without issue so long as it had an Internet connection when you started; it will cache the entire route, and enough site-routes to accommodate a bit of rerouting.

When using Apple Maps turn-by-turn in a foreign country, you can get your phone on the hotel wifi, enter your destination, give it a few seconds to download all the data it requires, and then leave the hotel (and wifi coverage) without issue.

I don't yet know if Google Maps has similar behaviour. I hope it does, because Apple Maps seems useless for anything but driving directions, and I don't have a car. Whatever possessed them to remove public transit directions is beyond me. They took out all the features I used, and put in features I either don't use or use extremely infrequently.

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[shutdown -p now]

When using Apple Maps turn-by-turn in a foreign country, you can get your phone on the hotel wifi, enter your destination, give it a few seconds to download all the data it requires, and then leave the hotel (and wifi coverage) without issue. I don't yet know if Google Maps has similar behaviour.

It does on Android. I wouldn't rely on that, though, since there are many reasons why you might want to detour on the road, and then suddenly it can't recompute your route...

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[Guspaz]

Does the Android version support at least minor route recalculations? Apple Maps was able to recalculate our route without an internet connection when we deviated by a few blocks by missing a turn, but we never tested it for major detours.

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[Anonymous Coward]

Where on Earth are you?

Apple Maps works brilliantly in London and its surroundings, and the only thing it lacks is 'Street View'.
Given a choice between the current Apple Maps and the old Google-based one with Street View I'd take the current offering.
(Of course now I can have both - if I find myself missing Street View on my phone I'll download Google's app, if not I won't bother.)

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[Guspaz]

Montreal, but I can guarantee you that Apple Maps doesn't work brilliantly in London if you take public transit. This was my primary and frequent use of the Maps app in previous versions of iOS, so Apple Maps removing this feature made it pretty much useless. I've used Apple Maps on a few trips where I wasn't the driver, but we're talking about once or twice a year here.

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[shutdown -p now]

I don't actually use it for car navigation - I prefer dedicated GPS units for that (largely because they can work 100% offline), so I don't know.

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[Guspaz]

It's worth noting that there are offline navigation apps available for most major smartphone platforms, and they often cost significantly less than a dedicated GPS unit. Often they're even from the companies that make the dedicated GPS units.

Re:Apple Maps turn-by-turn is decent

[shutdown -p now]

Yes, I know. Even so, I prefer standalone units for other reasons - bigger screens, for one, and another is resistive touch (meaning you can use them in gloves). Though now that Nokia has a capacitive screen that can handle gloves in Lumia 920, I'm somewhat tempted...

This is good news

[Cro Magnon]

I'm driving somewhere unfamiliar soon, and I wasn't really planning to go to Australia.

Getting Google to Fix Contacts Integration ASAP

[caspy7]

One pretty big shortfall I'm seeing is a lack of integration with the system Address Book. This is a feature I use *very* frequently and makes for a bunch of extra work to copy & paste otherwise. I'm unsure what exactly led to this oversight, but I think it's important to make sure it's on Google's radar.

To report your desired for contacts integration to Google:
1) Open Google Maps
2) Shake your phone in order to give feedback
3) Tell them that you miss integration with the Address Book

They get a lot of feedback, but with enough reporters statistical analysis should put contacts integration on their radar. The more people giving feedback on it, the more likely it will be on top of their todo list.

Interests of public safety would have denied app

[SuperKendall]

Since Google Maps are leading people the wrong way down a narrow road, if public safety were a factor they would have sent it back for further work.

At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[SuperKendall]

Open the new Google Maps app. Search for Denver. Now search for "Airport".

See all those dots? Not one of them is Denver International Airport, the largest airport in Denver and the one you will be using flying domestic or international flights.

With Apple Maps, a similar search at a similar zoom level not only shows DIA, but selects it as a featured choice.

So how has Apple been hurt by improving search over Google? It's kind of funny that after so long at being tops in mapping, Google has been bested in some search results by Apple... the Apple built maps app is certainly nicer to use as well. None of those things are true for any of the other mapping competitors like Nokia, I've tried that app also and frankly the searching there leaves a lot to be desired.

The good thing about this though is that now there is REAL competition in mapping, and I think Google maps will improve also. It seems like for years they have been kind of letting map errors slide but they can do so no longer - Ill bet that Denver Airport slip is fixed pretty soon.

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[Anonymous Coward]

Also for years (up until 2011) google would send you very strange places (and to a very dangerous part of the city, which I found out the hard way, fortunately it was just the 2 miles of walking that was the problem) when searching for numbered piers (their office USPS address) in San Francisco, which happens to be the home of many google employees.

the text in this spells it out. "The map that Meetup.com autogenerates for Dog Patch Labs is wrong. Don't use it. You will end up very far away. "
http://www.hackersandfounders.com/events/12971668/?eventId=12971668&action=detail&value=Hackers+and+Founders--San+Francisco

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[Anonymous Coward]

And there is this from 2011
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!search/%22pier$2039%22$20google$20maps/google-mapmaker/MNIlyo4IMnc/aBBqPqj4dEcJ

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[bad-badtz-maru]

And what you are seeing is a community of end users, who can all edit Google Maps directly, discussing how to best correct some POI data. How can I do this on Apple Maps? Apple will never be able to compete with Google. Most of the comparison between their mapping products so far is on cartography, the Denver airport is the first real mention of POI data (and a rare fail on Google's side). Thousands and thousands of businesses open and close each day in the US alone, Apple will never be able to keep up with the changes (much as Navteq and Garmin never have). Google can, because they crowdsource the information. It's classic cathedral vs bazaar.

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[Anonymous Coward]

This was several years after the release of the product and in an area that google employee's themselves should seen and questioned the results. The truth is that google had some serious issue with accuracy for years.

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a rather curious result, but it is also an odd way of searching. Why search for "denver" and "airport" seperately? I can't vouch for the iOS version of Google Maps, but on the Android version if you actually search for "denver airport" it does actually show you DIA.

Re:At least Apple Maps can find the Denver airport

[Anonymous Coward]

I should have mentioned that when I tested it with the seperate searches, I did get the more or less the same result as in the link.

Biggest AAPL mistake.

[csumpi]

Apple messed up big time. All they needed is one phone call to google:

Apple: We stop being dicks, no more lawsuits about round corners and sliding buttons.
Google: Sounds good, we give you maps with turn by turn navigation.

This would've saved them many millions on last minute crappy programmer hires to churn out a failed maps app. Their stock price probably wouldn't have tanked. Users would be happy. Ending the stupid patent lawsuits would've been a huge win for consumers.

Unfortunately they only kept the worst of Steve Jobs' (destroy android lawsuits) without a clear vision for future products (changing the aspect ratio of iphone and a 7" tablet that costs almost twice as much with half the specs etc).

Maps hullabaloo overrated

[swb]

IMHO, the Apple maps app is far better than the media and the naysayers would have you believe.

Every time I've used turn-by-turn, including in suburban areas with idiotic short streets and those are-they-roads-or-parking-lots near shopping centers, it's been spot-on.

"What about transit info?" Transit info in the old Google maps app blew, at least as far as subway info in NYC went. Missing/mismarked entrances, etc. "iTransNYC" worked far, far better and there are similar apps for major city rail systems. Outside of that, how many people REALLY own iPhones and ride the bus? In most metro areas outside of those served by urban rail, the bus service blows. Everybody drives.

I had plenty of mismarked locations with Google maps, not just 4 years ago, but in the last year. It was far from perfect, as have most standalone GPS devices I've used in rental cars.

To me, this seems like resistance to change or just anti-Apple ranting. I downloaded the Google app to check it out, but IMHO I still like the Apple app better, especially visually.

Re:Maps hullabaloo overrated

[feandil]

Except when you leave in a place where the data is simply wrong. Apple maps cannot find the busiest shopping street in Montreal (it sends you to whatever midwest town). it's not New York but it's not Tombuctu either. so leaving here means you simply cannot use the app at all.

Re:Maps hullabaloo overrated

[addie]

Outside of that, how many people REALLY own iPhones and ride the bus?

Maybe in America, but here in Canada (specifically Vancouver) most young people and their smartphones get to work either by transit or bicycle. Not only because it's much, much cheaper but also because it's easier and it's considered cool. I have a 45 minute commute with my iPhone for $124 per month, as opposed to a 40 minute commute with my hands on the wheel for upwards of $500 per month (car payments, insurance, gas, and parking).

I hope someday the same becomes true where you live.

Re:Maps hullabaloo overrated

[R3d M3rcury]

From what I've seen, Apple Maps works very well--as long as you gave it an address to go to.

If you asked, "Direct me to 1313 Mockingbird Lane," no problem. If you said "Direct me to the closest Verizon store," you were likely to end up somewhere else--probably where a Verizon store was about 3 years ago.

The real opportunity is competition

[SuperKendall]

If I were Apple, I would push out a patch today that scraps Apple Maps and replaces it with Google.

Why would Apple want to degrade search results or lead people the wrong way down dangerous roads?

At this point iOS *AND* Android users are worse served by Apple going back to Google maps. If you think about it the whole world is better off with Google finally having real competition in mapping, that can best Google at times and cause Google to have to start correcting map errors in a timely fashion. For years Google was unable to find a simple Arby's in Elko, NV - just months after Apple Maps was released, Google fixed that error and it now returns the correct results.

If you run Android, you should thank Apple because they are driving Google to improve maps also. As people find humorous and dangerous errors in either mapping app, they will report it and both maps will improve rapidly.

As for an Office 365 replacement - well actually Pages and Numbers work quite well even on an iPhone. Although it would not be my first choice I've edited spreadsheets on a train before using my iPhone thanks to Numbers...

Re:The real opportunity is competition

[BasilBrush]

Why would Apple want to degrade search results

Apart from the search difference, that side by side short makes it clear how much more ugly Google Maps are than Apple Maps. Both the UI and the map display.

That is no help at all

[SuperKendall]

That would probably solve the map issue and put Nokia out of its misery.

Have you used the Nokia app on iOS? Search results are worse, at least in the U.S. Satellite data is also older, sometimes a LOT older (Hoover Dam on Nokia shows the bridge only partially constructed and with the same warping errors that Apple and Google have).

Apple started out with better search results than Nokia, and in some cases already beats Google. In another year they may well surpass Google overall if they keep fixing reported errors.

Re:That is no help at all

[Anonymous Coward]

In another year they may well surpass Google overall if they keep fixing reported errors.

You remind me of a friend I had when I was 5. He was 4. He said, "when I turn 6, I'll be older than you!"

Not realistic.

[SuperKendall]

They could have simply left the old gmaps app since their license had not *yet* expired, and at least avoided this debacle

That would have just pushed out the problem. Googles terms would only have got more onerous (what reason would Google have had to make terms easier on Apple as a hard deadline approached??). Apple needed to push out maps as soon as possible because they had reached the point where they had a good set of maps, but they could not really improve that much more without a ton of real-world user feedback.

In truth Apple should have replaced Google maps about a year earlier, that would have been before a lot of the growth they say and improved maps even more. But maps were probably not nearly as ready then so they balanced the need to build a new mapping system with the need for users to have a stable map that mostly worked.

As it is now all Apple needs to do is keep integrating user feedback on maps, and within a year it will be hard to tell the difference in accuracy searching on Google or Apple maps - and in the meantime iOS users have far better map features than they would have otherwise.

Sign in

[EStrat]

Unfortunately, it appears you have to sign in to your google account to save anything, and there's no access to your contacts on your phone. If I'm wrong, please someone point out how to do these things. If I'm right, bogus.

Still cant open the app from a web search

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the best features is still missing, being able to click on the map that accompanies a websearch, and having it load right into the app for directions. What a pain it is to copy and paste.

Google Maps SDK has some serious limitations

[SuperKendall]

The more interesting aspect of this story to me, is that Google also is offering an SDK for iOS developers. If Google really wants to keep collecting a lot of data, it seems like they would want to make it really attractive to use Google maps in an application over the built in Apple mapping framework.

Looking over the licensing terms though, it would seem the Google Maps SDK is kind of developer hostile. Not only do they have limited access to API keys at the moment, but look at the restrictions Google imposes on you as an app developer. Only 2500 requests per day for geocoding or directions - an absurdly low figure for any mapping application to be distributed to millions of people. Even the "business" plan (which I believe you have to pay Google for) as what I consider to be an overly low API request limit of 100k requests a day.

As an iOS developer there is NO way I would replace the use of the iOS mapping framework (where geocoding requests are unlimited) with Google's SDK.

Re:Google Maps SDK has some serious limitations

[ceoyoyo]

Sounds like Google's standard maps SDK terms. It's always been that way.

Apple also thinking what is best for app developer

[SuperKendall]

Look at the Google Maps SDK licensing terms.

Until Apple switched over to Apple Maps, those were the terms that iOS developers had to live with using the mapping SDK. Apple offers unlimited geocoding queries, Google has a limit of 2500 per day across all instances of your application!

Google also has higher limits if you pay them, but even those limits are way too low for a popular application.

Also under the Google Map regime, developers COULD NOT provide turn my turn directions on top of Google Maps. Now that Apple is providing maps there is no restriction at all to what overlays a developer chooses to put on a map.

In the end are not the users of a system served better by an endless variety of applications free to use maps in any way they like? It's not about any ONE application, it's about thousands of them.

That's the bad Google UI, not lack of transit

[SuperKendall]

Not in St Louis: "public transit information not available in this region"

You must have tried to use the sidebar. That only shows things like subway and train routes, not bus or other info... At first I also thought it meant there was no metro routing in my area too.

The thing is it DOES offer metro access for anywhere the desktop maps app does. You just have to search for a location and ask for directions there; then when you select "metro" for routing it will give you bus directions.

Yes, and Android users should be pissed off

[SuperKendall]

Sounds like Google's standard maps SDK terms. It's always been that way.

Yes, I know. These terms have prevented me from building several mapping applications that I now have under construction for iOS.

As it stands it is impossible to port these applications to Android under those restrictions. Just because Google is loathe to give up collecting as much data by having you use maps in the context of an application, Android users will be denied all kinds of interesting map based applications that might have been - and Google is preventing themselves from becoming a dominant force of mapping in applications on iOS, which they very well could be without those restrictions.

Re:Yes, and Android users should be pissed off

[ceoyoyo]

Why should Google want to be the dominant force in mapping applications? Google is an advertising company, probably the largest one on the planet. They provide services like mapping because it allows them to collect information that lets them target ads, making those ads more valuable and making them more money.

Yes, Android being owned and developed by an advertising company might hurt it in the long run.

Oblig iOS Maps joke

[Jim Hall]

As a result of Apple's actions, they have their own map service they are improving ...

"A man using iOS Maps walks into a bar. Or maybe it's a church, or maybe a school, I'm not sure."

Re:Oblig iOS Maps joke

[jimbo]

I remember lots of stories about misdirection and problems when Google started their mapping services. They've had to work a lot on that over the years.

No mapping solution is perfect, though Google now has the least faulty offering.

Google passed up an opportunity to make a killing

[Anonymous Coward]

They could have charged $100 for the app, and everyone would have still bought it given how bad Apple's maps are.

Look Within

[SuperKendall]

Why should Google want to be the dominant force in mapping applications? Google is an advertising company

You answered you own question. Knowing where is user is often is a huge boon in targeting advertising.

Google being an advertising company is ESPECIALLY why they want to know where you are.

It's why in the iOS app they are nagging you often to log in, so they can tie the map results back to the other details they know about you more easily. You do not even get search history without logging in.

Re:Look Within

[ceoyoyo]

I should have been more specific - why should Google want to be the dominant force in mapping if by "dominant force" you mean providing you with mapping data cheaply or for free and not being able to gather as much information?

Google wouldn't give Apple access to all the features they wanted unless Apple let Google track people more (integrating Latitude in the Google Maps app was apparently a big sticking point). And Apple was paying Google a lot more than for one business license. Why would Google let you have free access to their mapping data when they can't gather any more information than they could with the Apple maps app?

Google isn't in the business of giving away stuff for free. Google is in the business of trading services and data for other data.

winna!

[pbjones]

would Google have improved their map app if Apple had not removed it in the first place?

Look Again

[SuperKendall]

if by "dominant force" you mean providing you with mapping data cheaply or for free and not being able to gather as much information?

What you state is impossible. By giving you the data they inherently gain the knowledge of the data yo have requested. Any data given by anyone is never "free".

Why would Google let you have free access to their mapping data when they can't gather any more information than they could with the Apple maps app?

You might want to ask Google that since it is exactly what they are doing with the release of the iOS google Maps SDK. They gain more information than before because the data requests come from a specific application, if nothing else.

But I've already provided the deeper answer... any dissemination of information is to google's benefit, the only question is the ease with which they can tie it back to you. One pull request from Gmail on your same device and it's irrelevant that you didn't explicitly give Google a Google ID.

You can report issues easily on Apple Maps

[SuperKendall]

And what you are seeing is a community of end users, who can all edit Google Maps directly, discussing how to best correct some POI data. How can I do this on Apple Maps?

It's easy to do so. Apple has a "report problem with map" link, both in just looking at the map (it's under the curl) and in looking at any specific location. It has many different categories of what the problem is to help refine data you enter - for example if you say place you found is in the wrong location, they let you place the pin on a map in the correct location. Or if details are wrong you can make changes and submit them.

Or you can say a search you just did resulted in the wrong results, it gives you the last few search terms to select from. Or you can simply add a location that should exist, but does not. Or there's a general bucket of "problem at this location" where you can free-form text entry. Apple is doing crowdsourced corrections even slightly better than Google at this point.

Obviously all that data has to be verified before Apple puts corrections on the map but the point is Apple has made it pretty much as easy as it can be for the average user to submit corrections to map data. That is how Apple can easily catch Google within a year, by simply processing the vast array of corrections users are submitting every day. Google has reached something of a plateau of map correctness; Apple has only to reach this same plateau. They are not that far away now for lots of regions and even ahead in some areas (like China). Once there the large number of users submitting corrections will keep Apple abreast with Google even as businesses close.

Google has a feedback mechanism built into the iOS Google Maps, but the entry is somewhat more limited in terms of pre-defined issues, and generally people do not use it as much as they have not been trained to do so. The large number of articles on Apple Maps issues have helped Apple in that lots of people know about, and use, the map correction features.

Voice turn by turn on iPhone 4!

[WoTG]

Yay! A free upgrade for iPhone 4 users like me, who were left out of turn by turn navigation. Just in time for my first trip to a new client's office tomorrow.

Kinda lame

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't anyone remember the goods in google maps? The latest one a mysterious disappearing island? Sheesh, you guys act if the maps don't work at all. I uses iOS maps for point to point directions all the time. Not one problem.