Slashdot Mirror
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?"
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.
until this is the most-downloaded app in the store? One day? A few hours?
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."
...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.
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.
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?
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
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.
Yeah. Apparently Apple has finally figured out that killing your customers isn't good business. /snark =
Works out pretty well for the tobacco industry.
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
"I almost died in Australia, thank god this is out." - 5 stars from Reed Morse
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.
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?
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.
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.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
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.
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.
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.
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.
#DeleteChrome
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.
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
E pluribus unum
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.
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 ...
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
If you can't convince them, convict them.
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
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!"
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.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
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.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
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.
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.
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.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
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.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.