I've been using the beta and all through it, there were no routing apps available for my area (San Antonio, so not exactly a tiny city, according to Wikipedia we are the 7th largest population wise)
Now that iOS 6 is out, I decided to give the Maps app a shot again. So I pulled it up, thought for a second since I am used to the old interface, clicked the wrong thing a couple times, finally got to where I needed to go. Scrolled through the saved list of directions that I've used in the past (very helpful). Clicked the bus button. Got routed to the App Store. There were 8 or so apps to pick from. Which ones sucked and which ones didn't, no idea. It's too new to tell.
Picked one at random, it's 99 cents, which is fine, I don't mind buying apps. It installs. And then sits there. Wait for a bit, maybe it's thinking or something (I'm on an iPhone 4, not 4S or 5). Okay, it's not. Go back into the maps app. It hasn't saved where I am, I'm back to the default screen. This time I remember so I go back to the directions. Click the bus button. Get routed back to the App Store again. This time the app I have says ROUTE. So I click it. It shows some introduction screen. I click the start button. Directions are blank.
Go back into maps, back to the directions, click the bus button, back to the App Store, click the route button, and the in the routing app, are two very different addresses than the ones I entered in to the Maps app. Scratch my head wondering how that happened.
Close Maps, close the routing app, delete the routing app, launch maps.google.com, get the bus schedule almost immediately.
I have no idea what anyone else's experiences are, but I have never been so disappointed.
Now as mentioned, I'm still on the iPhone 4, and I'm at the tail end of the contract, I believe next month is when I qualify for the upgrade without paying full price. I'm seriously looking at the S3, although the new report of the exploit via NFC is a bit troubling. I'm not particularly worried about the apps I've purchased on the iPhone. I've spent maybe 150 on apps on the almost 2 years I've had the phone, and as I was talking about it to a friend, he pointed out that as a smoker, I spend more than that per month on cigarettes, which really put things into perspective for me.
> I have no idea what anyone else's experiences are, but I have never been so disappointed.
Not being in the US, google maps has never provided any kind of mass transit information. Apple's implementation not providing it doesn't really change anything.
The imprecision of the map, though, that's a problem (because it is a step back)
I'm not sure whether you're specifically talking about Google's maps on iOS or not, but Google's web and Android maps clients both provide bus and train times for much of the UK.
It's not uniformly available in the US either. If the local transit authority publishes the data in the right format, then Google will add it to their maps. I suppose if there's sufficient interest they might write a custom scraper.
I'm not saying it's Google's fault (I know it very likely isn't). steevdave opened the door to other people's experience re. mass transit on Google Maps versus Apple Maps, I gave mine.
The NFC attack sounds way worse than it really is. Firstly, NFC attacks can not be made on an idle phone, phones need to be on, unlocked and practically touching the NFC tag, or other device.
As well as the fact that Android has technology that should mitigate the malicious use of NFC. I can't remember the exact measures, but I have read about it at one point.
I would think that NFC would be lumped into something around the issue of ATM/magnetic code skimmers, as possible, but not very likely.
If I were Google, I'd hold off on releasing a Maps for iOS just a little while. It's firmly in the "killer app" category at the moment and might help spur Android adoption just a little.
"If I were Google, I'd hold off on releasing a Maps for iOS just a little while. It's firmly in the "killer app" category at the moment and might help spur Android adoption just a little."
Based on this logic google should withhold search (after contract runs out) and only serve youtube in VP8. Releasing Maps soon but not immediately for Google (which is what it looks like they are doing) wins in several ways:
(1) reap the benefits of Apple's Maps launch negative publicity for a couple weeks.
(2) once your app hits, more people are using your services. Google loves people doing this.
(3) and less people using Apple Maps and helping improve it. Keeps the gap wide.
(4) finally, if not approved, you can use the disapproval as another competitive advantage.
Nope. Maps is a huge differentiator. Search & Youtube is not. Windows and Android phones have good maps, iOS doesn't. No one will care much if the search is switched to bing or if youtube was not available as an app. Also youtube makes it money via ads which it shows in the latest app. I don't think google is monetizing maps much.
I agree YouTube may not be, but search is pretty big. However, Google would have a hard time blocking google.com from iPhone users without being anticompetitive.
They can not expend the effort to create a google maps app for iphone, but that's not the same as being actively anticompetitive as they would have to be if they wanted to block search from iPhone users.
Sorry. You missed the point. Google wants as many people to use youtube & search. It makes money via ads on both. Having it as default is good (google pays money to FF to be default for example) and even if it is not the default, people can use google by typing google.com in safari. From there, the experience is identical.
Similarly for youtube, google wants the widest audience. Wider the audience, more the ads and more money.
If apple switches from google to bing for safari default, apple gets to spite google a bit and google may lose quite a bit of traffic. This hurts Google. Google will never want to block iOS users from search or youtube.
Secondly, neither is a competitive advantage in smartphone markets. No one is going to switch platforms for either search or youtube.
Maps on the other hand, does not have much advertising. The previous app did not have any advertising at all. They got location data from it but they can get that from android phones. Google loses nothing if they don't release an app. If they don't release an app, it is a great advantage for android. So they have a tradeoff to make, whether to maintain that competitive advantage or release a maps app and gain some audience. If I were google, I wouldn't release maps. For the first time ever, android is way way ahead of iOS in one of the core features.
Incorrect: the maps app in iOS < 6 had plenty of ads in the form of sponsored listings. I can recall several times on a road trip recently where I searched for a point of interest, and got a sponsored listing... Sometimes it was right on top of the non-sponsored point, so I had to zoom in really far just to be able to select the desired pin.
iOS maps is basically another ad platform... And with iOS 6 being adopted at a high rate, Google would lose all those "eyeballs" and crowd sourced data if they didn't release their own iOS maps app.
I think the biggest thing, which is something Google can't bring to the table, is that any app that used the native API will now loom like crap. (iirc, that's how it worked)
Even if it is approved and released shortly it still doesn't solve the problem of it not being the default Map app. Contact links & location links will still open in Apple's Maps. Still waiting on something comparable to Android's Intents in iOS
There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't let you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered. This still bugs me.
> There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't let you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered.
It also doesn't let you override core applications (in that it picks the first one either way), and last time I checked it if two applications registered the same handler and you removed the first one, the association didn't switch to the second one it just broke.
May have been fixed since.
> I'd also like widgets one day.
I just want toggles in the notification bar (DND, airplane, 3G, roaming and location would be sufficient as far as I'm concerned). Instead of the waste of space that Stocks is (yes I know I can remove it from the notification center, and did)
> > There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't let you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered.
> It also doesn't let you override core applications
Hence "Apple don't let you choose which application to use" - it all happens at Apple's whim, and currently that excludes replacing system apps.
As an Android user, I had no idea that iOS didn't support customizable Intents or Widgets?! That's just crazy to me, since I use widgets for a lot of stuff, and there are several cases where I don't set a default because I want to use different apps to handle different intents depending on the situation (i.e. opening PDFs). I guess most iOS users don't know or care about that sort of thing, they "just want it to work", but man, I would be totally out of my element downgrading to an iPhone.
How does "competes with existing functionality" not wake up the antitrust regulators? Wasn't the entire IE shipping with Windows situation based on a competitive functionality?
That's not true, you don't have to be a monopoly to get in trouble for anti-competitive behavior, you just have to be... participating in anti-competitive behavior.
Nice phonetics.
You're right. No less frustrating though. Anytime I'm denied a choice, especially in the face of enforced inferiority it raises my hackles. Here's hoping all the protesting and ridicule will get the job done.
>In pretty much every thread about Apple on this site, you will be reminded that Android enjoys amazing sales.
And in the same threads and on Apple blogs like Gruber's and Siegler, you're constantly reminded how it doesn't matter because Apple takes ~75% of the profits, and statistics on how apps are more profitable on iOS because Apple users are the premium users willing to pay and how many Android users are too cheap to buy apps. So if you're an app maker looking to make money, iOS is pretty much close to a monopoly if you're trying to make money.
Its only a monopoly if you are very narrow minded about the market. Brew and J2ME have multi-billion dollar app markets that compete with Apple and Android in terms of volume.
So far as I know, Nokia was a leader in non/pre-iOS/Android app markets. For some reason I think their results weren't competitive with iOS or even Android...
Yes, but Microsoft did not completely ban Netscape from running on Windows like Apple did with podcast apps, Google Voice etc. so the situation is not exactly analogous.
Microsoft shipped their browser default since an OS without a browser did not make sense. The user was completely free to install any other competing browsers without needing to jailbreak the device.
If Microsoft actually stopped Netscape from running, could you imagine the backlash?
> Yes, but Microsoft did not completely ban Netscape from running on Windows like Apple did with podcast apps, Google Voice etc. so the situation is not exactly analogous.
Which is not relevant, I fear. Action was taken against microsoft because they were a monopoly and used their monopoly position both to hinder potential competition and muscle their way into new markets.
Google Voice was in limbo for over an year, was neither approved nor rejected. And if you the three browsers are equivalent to having a choice of three browsers on the desktop, think again. All of them are forced to use the builtin webkit.
I used it this morning and I was actually pleasantly surprised. My map experience wasn't worse as I expected, but actually much better with turn by turn.
The people most upset seem to generally be edge cases. I'm sure Apple will work those out as complaints roll in.
Google has had 7 years to perfect maps. Apple feels maybe a year behind in some respects and a year ahead in others, but definitely not 7 years behind.
51% of the world currently lives in cities.[1] 79% of Americans do. The preferred mode of transportation in cities is public transit – a highly useful competency of the old Maps app in which Apple has replaced the UX of "here's how to get there from here" to "hey, go look in the App Store."
51% of the world. 79% of Americans "Edge cases," you say?
To be fair, plenty of American cities have crappy public transit. On the other hand, plenty of people in non-US cities absolutely depend on public transit because cars and/or gas are substantially more expensive (on an absolute basis and/or relative to the local standard-of-living).
Turn by turn is completely separate from the complaints about Apple Maps. I'm sure they work great, provided that your destination is plotted correctly in their database.
As for edge cases, that's the point. You have to be able to trust a mapping application with areas which are unfamiliar to you. A maps app can only be useful if there's a high level of trust, and when you immediately see errors in Apple Maps (some of which are clearly the result of overzealous automation, like labeling "Airfield Park" as an actual airfield) that trust vanishes fairly quickly.
In my city the maps are perfect - in some areas better than Google. They've improved a huge amount since the first iOS 6 betas when whole roads were missing.
The business locations are not so great though. It's a big mish-mash of really old data and incorrect locations.
> Apple feels maybe a year behind in some respects and a year ahead in others, but definitely not 7 years behind.
I believe this comes from the fact that you had Apple's turn-by-turn.
Is that actually better (or a year better) than Google's turn-by-turn navigation that's been on Android for so long?
What do you mean? Google has never had control over the maps app on iOS. The previous app was also written by Apple, just using Google's Maps API.
For all we know, Google could have released their own maps app only to have it blocked by Apple for providing "duplicate functionality" since Apple bans developers from even revealing if their app has been rejected.
Even if you're right, it's edge cases that companies should care about. People who are not edge cases will comply anyway and use whatever is default, whereas it's people who are edge cases most likely to switch to a competitor (possibly leading more people with them).
People just need something to complain about and this was the most obvious choice. I too have been using the new Apple Map app and have had no problems with it.
The OP's point is that this feels a lot like Antennagate 2010, where a large number of non-Apple users latched onto the fact that there was something wrong with Apple products, and complained louder than the actual Apple users. At this point, we can call all the evidence anecdotal until we see some hard numbers on how much map data is actually incorrect, and what actual percentage of the population is affected (I'm not holding my breath for that data, though).
I agree, though, that Apple rushed in prematurely with a new version of Maps -- either they screwed up big time engineering/management wise, or their hand was forced business-wise (I'm leaning towards the latter).
So putting the "outrage" aside for a moment, how well do maps work on your phone, and did you notice any problems so far?
To me, Google's tone at their pre-WWDC Maps event (and the effort they made to demonstrate things on iOS devices) doesn't seem consistent with the hypothesis that they decided to force Apple's hand.
> The OP's point is that this feels a lot like Antennagate 2010, where a large number of non-Apple users latched onto the fact that there was something wrong with Apple products, and complained louder than the actual Apple users.
The difference here is that there actually was something wrong with the iPhone rather than people having a preference to using Google Maps. Apple is banking on turn-by-turn keeping enough people at by until they're able to squash the shortcomings.
> The biggest losers are Brazil, India, Taiwan, and Thailand (population: 1.5 billion) which overnight will go from being countries with every maps feature (transit, traffic, and street view) to countries with none of those features, nor any of the new features either.
To be fair, Apple's Maps in Bangkok is actually pretty good. We never have Street View until a few months ago (and it only covers central part of Bangkok). Google Maps transit was never really good here since it only contains data from BMTA, traffic is possibly the only thing I truly miss.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the complaints aren't based on lack of those features, but very poor POI and mapping. How does one provide statistics on that without end users actively documenting every mishap?
My experience is the same as the GP comment—the maps are fairly decent—and I live in Toronto.
Are there problems? Yes. Will they get fixed? Yes. Does Apple have to do an OS update to fix these? No.
People are finding major problems because they’re looking for major problems. Apple has failed to clear the hurdle of "as good as" the old mapping data from Google, but for most people I suspect it will be "good enough."
I like your comment a lot because I often feel like Silicon Valley dismisses the Midwest (sometimes even including Chicago!) as an edge case / not important and that's in the same country even.
Thank god. I'm holding off on upgrading to iOS 6 until this is released, so it will be very welcome. I live in a city, so accurate location data is important to me (and I prefer not to use the web based google maps because I don't want to give safari permission to use location data)!
That being said, 9to5Mac seems to emphasize that an app was submitted and Jim Dalrymple seems to emphasize that it isn't sitting in review.
There's one simple way those could be consistent: an app could have been submitted and rejected. Google's and Apple's different points-of-view might even be giving us the contrasting spins on the situation.
If this is true, then Google is making a catastrophically bad tactical error, or Apple Maps are not as horrendously awful as the blogosphere is making them out to be (haven't had a chance to try them myself).
I believe it to be a very wise tactical move. You have unhappy Apple customers looking for an immediate alternative. By the time Apple gets maps to an acceptable user state, the Apple customers will already have adapted to using Google maps on an Apple device. That's a major blow to Apple IMO.
Sorry - I meant the decision to put an App in the App Store. If the Apple Maps are bad as people seem to be proclaiming, Google should let iOS 6 brew up ill will with Apple's customer base, especially since Apple users tend to upgrade their OS's immediately, and use it to promote Android.
You could alternatively see this situation as Google signaling that they are willing to act in the best interests of the consumer even if it means sacrificing strategy, putting them in stark contrast with Apple in the eyes of the people who are critical of Apple's new mapping application (ie, the people who are going to be deciding to continue using Google's maps.)
I don't think that the typical consumer's understanding of technology industry dynamics is deep enough for this to be relevant. I think the decision is more like, "Steve's phone's maps suck, I don't want that phone."
After all, all of these companies have faced huge amounts of criticism (Apple for worker's conditions, Google for its actions in China, Facebook for privacy issues), and they don't seem to meaningfully erode consumer enthusiasm.
You're right. I think the thought process likely to go through most consumers heads is either:
"This new maps thing sucks. Oh look, I can get Google's maps again. Thanks Google!"
or
"This new maps sucks. Oh well, the rest of the phone is great."
Google passing up the chance to keep people who already like one of their products happy on the off chance that they can pry Apple consumers away from Apple doesn't strike me as the best decision in the world.
Do most users actively know that the tiles in the iOS 5 Maps application are served by Google? The app itself is Apple top to bottom -- the display does say "Google" in the lower-left-hand corner -- but it would be interesting to know how users think of their iPhone maps application.
Hm, maybe - but withholding maps from iOS could be considered evil and backfire into Google antipathy. Also I the impact might not be so great after all - fans will be fans...
> Google wants as many people to use its maps as possible.
If that were true, they would offer the service for free. As it stands, for normal contracts, only the first 25,000 requests per day are free[1]. If we assume Google wasn't willing to give Apple a special pricing deal, with 300M+ iOS devices in the wild, Apple could easily be left shelling out a fortune each day to user their data.
I am pretty sure using a maps app is more like visiting maps.google.de in a browser, that is, it would be free. The pricing link you gave is for embedding Google Maps into your product. If anything, I suspect Google paid Apple to keep maps on the iPhone, and now Apple's demands were getting too much.
Yes the consumer web offering is free (and includes Google ads) and is still available through the browser on iOS 6.
You are wrong about the revenue direction. Apple were a significant provider of revenue to Google for map usage. Below is just the article I picked but Googling for 'google maps ios revenue' brings up quite a number.
I suspect Apple were upset at the limitations believed to be imposed on them by the Google contract (no turn by turn) and it was expiring anyway. It was probably negotiated when they had no idea how sucessful the iPhone was going to be. Google probably also wanted more control to insert advertising and the fact the two firms are now competitors in mobile OS's and at legal loggerheads made agreement unlikely.
If what you say is true – which I have to disagree with: If you built a third-party Maps app that duplicates the functionality, you would most certainly be subject to API fees – there is the secondary issue of Apple allowing Maps (and Youtube, for that matter) to completely stagnate. The iOS 5 version of Maps was still a pretty poor experience for the timeframe, even if you feel it was better than the new version.
What incentive was there for Google to back Apple's poor implementations when they can just release their own versions that actually bring the features Google wants to offer their customers on their own schedule, as they are doing now?
Embedding a map with a search field in an HTML page is no different than maps.google.com either, but you will be subject to the API terms because those are the terms Google has decided upon. They could ask browser vendors to pay too, if they wanted to, but have chosen not to. They chose to charge those who implement software using their API. A Maps app like Apple's, which does far more than pointing to maps.google.com, needs to use the API service, which Google has decided to charge a fee for. Granted, Apple could have struck an independent deal with Google to use the service without said fee. That, we will never know.
But what reason would Apple have to go out of their way to maintain their own datasource (and pay other vendors, like TomTom, for help) if Google's data already fit the bill? Even more so if Apple was going to be paid to use it as you speculate. A dislike for Android isn't reason enough, especially as this move strengthens Androids position for the time being. The only logical explanation is that Google wasn't willing to play ball, for one reason or another.
> I suspect Google paid Apple to keep maps on the iPhone, and now Apple's demands were getting too much.
Good example of that weird "Google can do no wrong even though it's a company built on collecting information about users and selling it" nerd mentality. It's well known that Google was increasing it's map fees.
Ok, this is an interesting twist to the story. See my comments elsewhere on why I don't think an App version of Google Maps would see the light of day (if it did that would definitely count as 'plan C' in my book).
Apple lost this particular battle ( mobile search ) the day Google bought Android. OSM is cool as we know, but it was not deployed until now, and the reaction is epic. Apple will fight the good fight like bing is doing in web search, but ultimately will be found wanting, just like bing. The only f-u play Apple has left is to spend billions of dollars making OSM on par with GoogleMaps, contributing that knowledge 'upstream,'watching specialized maps services eat google maps' ad lunch. I seriously doubt that would happen, but it's the only play left. "If I can't play then no one can..."
I had this idea recently of splitting the internet into two internets: one for Apple fans and one for Apple haters. Apart from getting rid of a lot of flamewars, Apple could rule supreme in the Apple internet, be the best search engine there and so on. If you never know that there are better options, you can be happy.
After checking out the bunch of complaints, I wonder what's going on with Apple's quality process. They must had seen some of this 'roller coaster street' bugs before...
They either sacrificed quality for getting the product out soon... Or maybe they are assuming most of fans won't care about the bugs just because they'll get the new phone anyway... Or their quality process just needs some improvements.
Um, doesn't Apple source much of their underlying data from TomTom? Absent incredible stupidity on one side and/or the other could TomTom really be holding out on them?
The problem is there is no other company that does maps and so Apple cannot even buy some one to fill the gap. They are now forced to grow/improve the maps organically, which will take some time. But this is Apple they will get there.
but they are both severly crippled on iOS, chrome is just a safari skin, and sparrow cannot be used as a default app for mail on iOS cannot use notification for new mail unless using 3rd party services (if you are trusting them with you email credentials).
If you're accusing Apple of copying iOS 5's Maps app for iOS 6's Maps app, you're accusing Apple of copying itself. Google provided the backend data and map tiles for Maps prior to iOS 6, but Apple wrote the app itself.
Are you insinuating that apple designed the look for google maps on the iphone? google maps existed long before it was on the iphone, through google.com. The iPhone map looks just like the home browser version. The style looks the same on an android, blackberry and iPhone. Apple ripped off google maps plain an simple, but I agree with the original poster, there is nothing wrong with that, and it just shows how full of BS apple really is.
> And it clearly demonstrates the utter bullshitness that is there fight against Samsung
The only thing it demonstrates is that you have no idea what you're taking about. The app "functionality" is "being a map" something Google has never patented. The UI elements are Apples, as they designed and built the iOS Maps app.
The only thing here that's a slavish copy is your comment. Reminds me strongly of the comments of a million other uninformed idiots that barely understand the concept they are trying to deride, yet insist it is hypocritical.
Yeah, it's the worst hypocrisy to use assets you designed and a concept that can't be patented in a new app. I heard Apple has a calendar app too? Is that also a slavish copy of Google Calendar?
Apple didn't sue everyone who made a phone FFS. They sued Samsung, a company that genuinely did rip them off and try as hard as they can to present Android and their devices as much closer to the iPhone than anything else.
Apple isn't doing a single thing that's similar with Maps. They're just making a Maps app. Google doesn't own the concept of mobile mapping.
This patent war is ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that so many people are now convinced that apple is merited with their claims. Patent laws have turned into a scary world for creative design, no one is safe. Here's a great article giving some insight into why maybe apple isn't so innocent after all;
I stand corrected... Totally thought maps was a google app!
Regardless, apple are still massive hypocrites for all of the many other features they rip off from android etc while being shocked and outraged that someone might do that to them.
Wonder how this jives with Gruber's comments on the maps situation:
>Using Maps to Improve Maps
>> Scott Rafer:
>>What’s missing from this conversation is that map usage is critical. […] Google’s maps are going to start degrading. Apple’s will get better. They’ll meet in the middle within 18 months.
>The idea is that you need to collect usage data to improve your data. The only way for Apple to get from here to there is to release what they have now and improve the data as millions of people start using it.
This is such a stupid assumption. Apple's maps will never reach Google's.
Why? Because Google's business model is so heavily dependent on highly accurate maps at so many levels. There's been posts on HN regarding Google's usage of Streetview/OCR to improve their map directions, and it's absolutely critical that their maps be the absolute highest quality in terms of content and accuracy of that content for their driverless cars.
Google has and will continue to invest massively in maps, and no user feedback will ever approach that investment.
There is one way Apple's maps already surpass Google's: no advertising.
For instance the iOS 5 Youtube app never showed ads, whereas the new app store one shows tons of them. Sometimes 1/4th of the screen is advertisement.
I'm sure it will be the same way for maps. Looking up a bus route, looking for used cars for cheap? Oh you are walking someplace, wouldn't you like a bicycle? There's five StarBucks® on your route!
No thanks. If I need the better features in Google Maps then I'll use it, but I'll go with the ad-free version if it works well enough.
The advertising isn't intrusive in the Android version of Maps.
It's also worth noting that, like search advertisements, Maps advertisements have the potential to be useful. If I'm looking for a restaurant near some location, restaurants that care enough to advertise in Maps for that location could easily be worth considering.
I guess in that sense, my 'map app' (a photo of the street I live on) also surpasses google's because it doesn't have any ads.
No, maps are not of any use if you can't use them and rely on them. It has nothing to do with how Google chose to monetize it. If your ad-free version works well enough - great. But the whole point is that the new maps don't work well enough.
> There is one way Apple's maps already surpass Google's: no advertising.
For now. Let's not forgot Apple tried to push full screen, "interactive" iAds. While banners ads have been more popular, the extra screen real estate on the iPhone 5 could eventually become devoted to ads.
I thought Gruber was getting more balanced. I guessed wrong.
Maps don't improve by themselves. They improve by complaints, feedback, input.
They also don't degrade by themselves. Unless Gruber et al are under some amazing assumption that Google now has no investment in Maps, is not getting street data, topographical data, traffic data any more.
Though, mind you, this assumption isn't far fetched. Much as some of these pundits live their life in the Apple ecosystem, they seem to be blissfully (or willfully) ignorant of the fact that "mobile Maps" is but one segment of Google Maps. Millions of people rely on it, daily, on their desktops.
To be fair: maps do "degrade by themselves", simply because the world changes and they must be updated to prevent being wrong in the future. Obviously that's no more or less true of any data source, so Gruber still isn't making any sense...
>What’s missing from this conversation is that map usage is critical. […] Google’s maps are going to start degrading.
By that logic, Apple Maps would never reach Google Maps anyways as there are way more people using Android phones and/or web-based Google Maps then there are iPhone users. Regardless, the article "How Google Builds Its Maps"[0], which was recently submitted on HN, seems to indicate that Google improves the bulk of its map data through Google employees rather then through user feedback (although I suspect it's a mix of both).
LIDAR itself? It doesn't really. A fleet of cars with, in addition to LIDAR, cameras that provide you with source material for as much OCRing as you have server-farms to afford? That helps.
As map data changes over time (road construction, POI movement, etc.), Google Maps could fall out of date. Of course, I doubt that's a major threat, since Google will presumably still be the primary maps platform on Android and the desktop web.
I think Gruber was postulating that Apple would continue updating the app to take advantage of iOS in deeper ways while Google wouldn't put the same level of effort into the iOS version of the app, making it stagnate. So more of degrading of the iOS experience than anything related to map data.
He wrote "Google’s maps are going to start degrading", not that their app would degrade. He seems to imply that with less iOS users, they'd get less corrections - which ignores the large userbase of Google Maps on other platforms (Android, web).
The ability to take passive GPS readings and integrate with other parts of iOS is pretty powerful. Imagine if you had a reminder to "Buy new guitar strings" -- your phone could beep and say "You're just around the corner from a musical instrument store -- would you like to get those strings?" Of course, Apple could also decide whether or not to charge the instrument store for this lead generation.
They can legally do whatever they want. They've pulled apps before for the same rule. It's part of playing in Apple's ecosystem. As a developer you always take the risk that Apple will decide to wield the ban-hammer, and you basically have no recourse.
Those aren't even remotely analogous. Nobody required Microsoft to sell Netscape. Microsoft got slapped for using its monopoly in Operating Systems to pressure third parties into not signing agreements to ship Netscape on their products.
The fundamental thing that's lacking here is that third-party coercion. The government is never going to force any company to carry and sell products they don't want to carry and sell.
> Surly it's not legal for Apple to potentially reject an app on such grounds?
Of course it is. The only ways for it to be illegal would be 1. if it infringed on freedom of speech (no way that's going to hold) or 2. an antitrust action (which would require Apple to be a monopoly)
Yep, typically freedom of speech applies to government censorship. A private party can shut you out of their system as they have no responsibility to provide you with a platform. "Freedom of speech" is so often a misused/misunderstood concept.
That's because Walmart is not a marketplace like ebay. An app store is a marketplace with terms and conditions, any one that meets those terms should be allowed to list their app.
No, you'd like the App Store to be a marketplace, but the way it's operated since its inception clearly demonstrates that Apple, as is their right, runs it as a curated store.
I've been using the beta and all through it, there were no routing apps available for my area (San Antonio, so not exactly a tiny city, according to Wikipedia we are the 7th largest population wise)
Now that iOS 6 is out, I decided to give the Maps app a shot again. So I pulled it up, thought for a second since I am used to the old interface, clicked the wrong thing a couple times, finally got to where I needed to go. Scrolled through the saved list of directions that I've used in the past (very helpful). Clicked the bus button. Got routed to the App Store. There were 8 or so apps to pick from. Which ones sucked and which ones didn't, no idea. It's too new to tell.
Picked one at random, it's 99 cents, which is fine, I don't mind buying apps. It installs. And then sits there. Wait for a bit, maybe it's thinking or something (I'm on an iPhone 4, not 4S or 5). Okay, it's not. Go back into the maps app. It hasn't saved where I am, I'm back to the default screen. This time I remember so I go back to the directions. Click the bus button. Get routed back to the App Store again. This time the app I have says ROUTE. So I click it. It shows some introduction screen. I click the start button. Directions are blank.
Go back into maps, back to the directions, click the bus button, back to the App Store, click the route button, and the in the routing app, are two very different addresses than the ones I entered in to the Maps app. Scratch my head wondering how that happened.
Close Maps, close the routing app, delete the routing app, launch maps.google.com, get the bus schedule almost immediately.
I have no idea what anyone else's experiences are, but I have never been so disappointed.
Now as mentioned, I'm still on the iPhone 4, and I'm at the tail end of the contract, I believe next month is when I qualify for the upgrade without paying full price. I'm seriously looking at the S3, although the new report of the exploit via NFC is a bit troubling. I'm not particularly worried about the apps I've purchased on the iPhone. I've spent maybe 150 on apps on the almost 2 years I've had the phone, and as I was talking about it to a friend, he pointed out that as a smoker, I spend more than that per month on cigarettes, which really put things into perspective for me.
Never has Apple tastes so sour.