GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
Well, I wouldn't have released maps in the state it's in today, so yes, I probably could have done a better job than this. The current maps would have never passed QA at most places I work. The second someone searched for a town and found it 50 miles off the mark, there would have been an all-stop put on the release until the data was better.
This isn't some inconvienence, like oh noes I have to borrow a USB floppy driver because I'm ten years behind the rest of the world. This is "Hey, we had this great maps app that worked, and never really got you lost, but we replaced it with this other maps app that's going to get you lost and has huge data holes...but hey, it might be better someday!"
You keep comparing in to floppy drives, and it's a very silly comparison. The world had moved to laser media a decade before the iMac did away with the floppy.
1. No, that's silly. There are alternatives for every app. GnomeTank has mentioned alternatives to the maps app. Is the userbase "split" because I use Chrome and you use Safari? (for example)
2. "Apple's best interest" is never something I've disagreed with. I'm talking about the users' best interests, though.
3. I don't think so, because there are other similar apps, and the contract with Google is still ongoing, right? So it's not like anything changed, Apple's just choosing not to take advantage of what they have, yes? If I'm wrong, though, that would be a good point.
1. No, that's silly. There are alternatives for every app. GnomeTank has mentioned alternatives to the maps app. Is the userbase "split" because I use Chrome and you use Safari? (for example)
2. "Apple's best interest" is never something I've disagreed with. I'm talking about the users' best interests, though.
3. I don't think so, because there are other similar apps, and the contract with Google is still ongoing, right? So it's not like anything changed, Apple's just choosing not to take advantage of what they have, yes? If I'm wrong, though, that would be a good point.
He's talking about having it pre-loaded. As in, their original GMaps app.
You're asking why they don't have it on the App Store, which is because the original app wasn't made by Google, but by Apple, with Google's input. So, I'm guessing the terms of their agreement currently require Apple to either have it pre-loaded, but not giving them the ability to throw it up on the store as a standalone.
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
0
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
I highly doubt that. It's not up in the Store because Apple wants people to use the new Maps, not because of some agreement with Google. You sometimes give Apple way too much credit and Google way too much blame, you've done this several times in this discussion, automatically assuming this all came apart because of some money grab by Google (which we've found out not to be the case).
I highly doubt that. It's not up in the Store because Apple wants people to use the new Maps, not because of some agreement with Google. You sometimes give Apple way too much credit and Google way too much blame, you've done this several times in this discussion, automatically assuming this all came apart because of some money grab by Google (which we've found out not to be the case).
Where did I give Apple too much credit or blame Google in what I just said? And its kind of laughable when you do the total opposite, and claim that Google couldn't have possibly have had any part in the existing app not being on the store.
Most business agreements cover shit like this--their API deal was likely ridiculously specific in order to make the deal acceptable cost-wise. If you think it was all loose and "Well, do whatever you want, we'll just sit back and relax" then you're being a goose.
InkSplat on
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
0
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
1. No, that's silly. There are alternatives for every app. GnomeTank has mentioned alternatives to the maps app. Is the userbase "split" because I use Chrome and you use Safari? (for example)
2. "Apple's best interest" is never something I've disagreed with. I'm talking about the users' best interests, though.
3. I don't think so, because there are other similar apps, and the contract with Google is still ongoing, right? So it's not like anything changed, Apple's just choosing not to take advantage of what they have, yes? If I'm wrong, though, that would be a good point.
I should clarify that I was referring to built-in, stock iOS apps in points 1 & 3. But, points taken.
Most of this would be easily resolved if Google released a decent version of their own Maps app. And even better if they actually put it on par with the Android version, which isn't something they've been willing to allow yet.
Also: regarding Tom Tom. Last time I used one a couple years back (it came in a rental car) for directions, shit was pretty badly out of date and just plain wrong a lot (in Boston). Particularly stores. It couldn't find a Trader Joes that had been there for 5+ years, among plenty of other little problems. I think Apple has taken most of that data and tried to supplement it with data from Yelp, Waze, and others, but obviously, they all have a good bit of work to do to be on par with Google. Thing is, I honestly believe it's a good thing to have at least one quality alternative to Gmaps, just like I believe Android's presence makes iOS a better operating system. I hate to sound like a broken record with this "long term" stuff, but some competing mapping services that are REALLY serious about it will only benefit users of ALL mapping services down the road.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
Google has always been pretty clear that it's core business (maps, mail, search) trumps Android, and that they won't ever lock those services away from other mobile platforms, because they transcend the mobile space and are too important.
I get why Apple wanted their own Maps, but their choice in implementing it, and releasing it with a very incomplete data set, was very hamfisted, and very un-Apple like.
I highly doubt that. It's not up in the Store because Apple wants people to use the new Maps, not because of some agreement with Google. You sometimes give Apple way too much credit and Google way too much blame, you've done this several times in this discussion, automatically assuming this all came apart because of some money grab by Google (which we've found out not to be the case).
Just to put it on the table, these are some things we do know almost for certain:
Apple's agreement with Google ends next year.
Google has reportedly been trying to get Apple to agree to allow them access to private user data for Maps users in the renewal.
Google has also apparently been bargaining to integrate Latitude into Maps on the next agreement.
Google has still refused to allow Apple access to turn-by-turn via the API.
I apologize for not having my sources handy, but most of these have been reported by the NY Times or the WSJ. Now, I'm not saying Google is evil for these demands (on the contrary, it makes the most sense for them and their own Android users), but I think anyone could see how Apple might want to seriously look into cutting ties and building their own solution that allows them to improve the experience as they see fit, rather than catering to Google's vision of how things should work.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Google has always been pretty clear that it's core business (maps, mail, search) trumps Android, and that they won't ever lock those services away from other mobile platforms, because they transcend the mobile space and are too important.
I get why Apple wanted their own Maps, but their choice in implementing it, and releasing it with a very incomplete data set, was very hamfisted, and very un-Apple like.
If that were actually true, their Gmail app wouldn't be a piece of shit on iOS, and they would have agreed to let the iOS Gmaps app have access to turn-by-turn directions.
Look, if I were Google, I'd make sure Android had the better experience with their services, too, but to claim that they're equal across all platforms is bullshit.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Oh please. We can be pretty sure that they didn't disagree categorically.
Apple just wasn't willing to pay the price google wanted
0
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
Google doesn't let ANYONE have access to turn by turn. That's not an Apple/Google thing, that's just a thing. That part of the Google API was added later, and never came under the agreements of the rest of the API.
Do you know of any turn by turn service using Google's turn by turn, other than Google? No.
And the reason the Gmail app on iOS is bad is because it's not needed, and thus Google has spent so little time maintaining it. Everyone that uses an iPhone just uses Mail, which has a Gmail adapter. Google had zero incentive to improve that app, so they just didn't. Now if Gmail itself was missing features when used from iOS, you'd have a point, but it's not.
Google doesn't let ANYONE have access to turn by turn. That's not an Apple/Google thing, that's just a thing. That part of the Google API was added later, and never came under the agreements of the rest of the API.
Do you know of any turn by turn service using Google's turn by turn, other than Google? No.
That's kind of my point. They flat-out don't allow the same capabilities across platforms, while claiming that they would never block mapping from non-Google platforms. Maybe I'm just not understanding the distinction here, but it sounds pretty doublespeak-ish.
Edit: unless, of course, they release their own app on iOS that is on par with their Android app. But until then, I just can't help but see that claim as bullshit.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Since my last post got bottom paged I'll ask again. If Apple is using TomTom's data why are their maps so deficient compared to Google's? Granted Google has tons of money to spend on constantly improved their services, such as maps, but are TomTom's maps and POI's really that far behind Google's? Did Apple just pick and choose what parts of TomTom's data they wanted to use or are they still in the process of taking that data and implementing/refining/retooling it to how they want Maps to function?
Since my last post got bottom paged I'll ask again. If Apple is using TomTom's data why are their maps so deficient compared to Google's? Granted Google has tons of money to spend on constantly improved their services, such as maps, but are TomTom's maps and POI's really that far behind Google's? Did Apple just pick and choose what parts of TomTom's data they wanted to use or are they still in the process of taking that data and implementing/refining/retooling it to how they want Maps to function?
Also: regarding Tom Tom. Last time I used one a couple years back (it came in a rental car) for directions, shit was pretty badly out of date and just plain wrong a lot (in Boston). Particularly stores. It couldn't find a Trader Joes that had been there for 5+ years, among plenty of other little problems. I think Apple has taken most of that data and tried to supplement it with data from Yelp, Waze, and others, but obviously, they all have a good bit of work to do to be on par with Google. Thing is, I honestly believe it's a good thing to have at least one quality alternative to Gmaps, just like I believe Android's presence makes iOS a better operating system. I hate to sound like a broken record with this "long term" stuff, but some competing mapping services that are REALLY serious about it will only benefit users of ALL mapping services down the road.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
No, it's not. If Google wanted to be a prick to Apple, they could have shut off the maps API the second Android released, or began to limit that API. They didn't. They added something NEW that no one else has access to, but they didn't screw anyone else out of using what they always had. For that matter, if you want me to get technical on you, the turn-by-turn API isn't even part of the maps API. You can go check this yourself if you'd like, by going to check the maps API documentation. The turn by turn API is actually part of Android itself, and simply uses Google data. It is not part of the web service API and never was.
This applies to search and mail as well. For instance, what search engine does Siri use right now? That would be Google. Google could, if it wanted to, say "No, Siri is not allowed to make voice searches, because we have our own voice search technology that competes", but they won't do that.
This brings up a great point, re Siri: Is Apple going to have Siri use another search engine soon too? Since they seem to be in this "Get rid of Google, no matter how much it fucks users" mode. Will I suddently find Siri using Yahoo or SearchBuddy or some other shit beause Apple wants to be cranky pants?
Sorry, @minor incident I missed that. I had a TomTom stand alone gps for a couple of years before I found it perfectly adequate for driving around upstate NY. I never used the POI stuff so I can't comment on that aspect of it, but the maps themselves never led me astray. However, it took ages to get a GPS lock and the first time I turned it on out of the box everything was in Swedish which was...problematic.
I'll go back and edit my original post so I don't look like a goose for asking the same thing twice.
Google doesn't let ANYONE have access to turn by turn. That's not an Apple/Google thing, that's just a thing. That part of the Google API was added later, and never came under the agreements of the rest of the API.
Do you know of any turn by turn service using Google's turn by turn, other than Google? No.
That's kind of my point. They flat-out don't allow the same capabilities across platforms, while claiming that they would never block mapping from non-Google platforms. Maybe I'm just not understanding the distinction here, but it sounds pretty doublespeak-ish.
Edit: unless, of course, they release their own app on iOS that is on par with their Android app. But until then, I just can't help but see that claim as bullshit.
Yeah, I wonder about the double standards placed on Google and Apple here in this case. Google Maps in iOS was definitely feature-deficient, no turn-by-turn, Street View, etc (edit: I was wrong, iOS did have Street View). Obviously Google withheld those features for various reasons, so when Apple didn't want to play ball also for various reasons, it's Apple's fault only?
Another thing that is interesting is this whole Apple still having another year left in the deal thing. It makes it sound like Google wasn't prepared for Apple to drop this deal, otherwise they would have an iOS version of Google Maps all ready to go like the YouTube app. So there's definitely some motives for Google here, in not having an iOS version of Google Maps. It's pretty much all on them at this point.
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
They actually couldn't have shut that API off or limit it, because they had an agreement in place with Apple.
Regarding Siri: I kind of doubt it. I could see an option in settings to swap to Bing or Yahoo, but Search is one area in which Apple has no apparent interest in trying to compete. They've added alternate search engines to Safari, but they've never removed Google. I think the popularity of Google for search eclipses Google Maps so much that they'd have to be really boneheaded to try to cut that out.
See related Safari screenshot:
They make it easy to switch, but Google is still right there in the prominent position.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Sorry, @minor incident I missed that. I had a TomTom stand alone gps for a couple of years before I found it perfectly adequate for driving around upstate NY. I never used the POI stuff so I can't comment on that aspect of it, but the maps themselves never led me astray. However, it took ages to get a GPS lock and the first time I turned it on out of the box everything was in Swedish which was...problematic.
I'll go back and edit my original post so I don't look like a goose for asking the same thing twice.
Yeah, that's the thing with GPS devices, they're usually perfectly fine if you give them a precise address (as is the new Maps app), but their POI database is typically fucking awful, which is something we're used to being MUCH better because of Google's extension POI database.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
No, it's not. If Google wanted to be a prick to Apple, they could have shut off the maps API the second Android released, or began to limit that API. They didn't. They added something NEW that no one else has access to, but they didn't screw anyone else out of using what they always had. For that matter, if you want me to get technical on you, the turn-by-turn API isn't even part of the maps API. You can go check this yourself if you'd like, by going to check the maps API documentation. The turn by turn API is actually part of Android itself, and simply uses Google data. It is not part of the web service API and never was.
This applies to search and mail as well. For instance, what search engine does Siri use right now? That would be Google. Google could, if it wanted to, say "No, Siri is not allowed to make voice searches, because we have our own voice search technology that competes", but they won't do that.
This brings up a great point, re Siri: Is Apple going to have Siri use another search engine soon too? Since they seem to be in this "Get rid of Google, no matter how much it fucks users" mode. Will I suddently find Siri using Yahoo or SearchBuddy or some other shit beause Apple wants to be cranky pants?
Yeah I don't think Apple is looking to get into search, but Siri's default search engines start with Wolfram-Alpha, right? Siri also uses different search services like Yelp, OpenTable, and Yahoo! Sports, depending on the kind of search. It's only when those searches return no results that Siri offers to search the web (with Google) for you.
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
edited September 2012
First off, lets clear some things up so we are all talking on the basis of facts and not assumptions:
* The pre-iOS 5 Maps app was not a Google product. Apple wrote that, it simply linked in to Google's API.
* Turn-by-turn is the only feature Google ever "stopped" Apple from using, and as I've pointed out, turn-by-turn isn't a feature of the Google Maps Web API, it's an actual Android library.
* Any feature that was missing that isn't turn-by-turn, was missing because Apple didn't add it.
All Apple was ever using was Google's Data.
As a side note, Apple could have written a turn by turn engine using Google's data....that's how Motion X does it. It uses Google's map data, but it's own turn-by-turn engine. In the same vein, Apple could have given us a map data chooser just like Safari has.
Like, it wasn't this morning, and now it is, so there is definitely something that is LOOSE that shouldn't be. If it were a design decision, it would have rattled out of the box, yeah?
And it's not a loose sleep/volume/home/mute button - I've tried holding those and shaking and the rattle persists.
Ugh, I really don't want to have to take it in. My nearest Apple store is like a 20m walk from work, which nukes my lunch hour.
Like, it wasn't this morning, and now it is, so there is definitely something that is LOOSE that shouldn't be. If it were a design decision, it would have rattled out of the box, yeah?
And it's not a loose sleep/volume/home/mute button - I've tried holding those and shaking and the rattle persists.
Ugh, I really don't want to have to take it in. My nearest Apple store is like a 20m walk from work, which nukes my lunch hour.
Play some sound through the built in speaker, see if it rattles really bad. Just a random thought, because my Nexus 7 showed up with a blown speaker and it rattled.
I highly doubt rattling is a design decision. Sounds like you have something loose or broken.
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
On all the iPhones since the 4, you could feel the vibration motor shake if you tapped it hard enough. If that's not what you're feeling/hearing, then you should totally get it replaced, because nothing should be *rattling* inside there.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
Yeah, I can shake my 4S pretty hard before you can feel/hear the vibration motor shake. In fact, I am doing it right now and I can't feel anything (my co-workers think I'm insane, I'm sure).
I know what you're saying, but if both were available, that would do no good. The purpose is to get people using the new app and collect usage data and take in their bug reports. If they just left the old app around, that would minimize the number of people actually using the new one.
That's just it. It won't get more polished until everyone starts using it. Just like Gmaps started getting phenomenally better after 2007 when iPhones and Android phones started shipping with it.
But it's so bad that people aren't going to use it. I'm not. If I can't trust it to give me the right directions, I'm not using it. I'll use the browser version of Google Maps until they release an app.
I sincerely doubt that most people aren't using it. My entire family is fucking bananas over the turn-by-turn stuff, as a small-sample-size counterpoint.
True, I forget about turn by turn because I don't drive. I walk, bike, and take transit, and Apple maps is pretty useless for me.
It's a pretty clear case of not being able to please everybody. I drive a lot for work, and for far turn-by-turn has proven immensely useful for me (and aside from being about one block off one time, the directions have been nearly perfect so far). At the moment, I'd absolutely take the new app in its current state over the old Google-backed maps app without turn-by-turn. Obviously that's not true for everyone, and I'm not trying to claim it is, just that it's the first step in a long process that has to be taken at some point, otherwise it's just another year of further lagging behind what Google allows Maps on Android to do, while losing another year of real user-feedback on their own app.
Most people I know use the directions for cars secondary. Public transit is a huge fricking deal.
I know what you're saying, but if both were available, that would do no good. The purpose is to get people using the new app and collect usage data and take in their bug reports. If they just left the old app around, that would minimize the number of people actually using the new one.
That's just it. It won't get more polished until everyone starts using it. Just like Gmaps started getting phenomenally better after 2007 when iPhones and Android phones started shipping with it.
But it's so bad that people aren't going to use it. I'm not. If I can't trust it to give me the right directions, I'm not using it. I'll use the browser version of Google Maps until they release an app.
I sincerely doubt that most people aren't using it. My entire family is fucking bananas over the turn-by-turn stuff, as a small-sample-size counterpoint.
True, I forget about turn by turn because I don't drive. I walk, bike, and take transit, and Apple maps is pretty useless for me.
It's a pretty clear case of not being able to please everybody. I drive a lot for work, and for far turn-by-turn has proven immensely useful for me (and aside from being about one block off one time, the directions have been nearly perfect so far). At the moment, I'd absolutely take the new app in its current state over the old Google-backed maps app without turn-by-turn. Obviously that's not true for everyone, and I'm not trying to claim it is, just that it's the first step in a long process that has to be taken at some point, otherwise it's just another year of further lagging behind what Google allows Maps on Android to do, while losing another year of real user-feedback on their own app.
Most people I know use the directions for cars secondary. Public transit is a huge fricking deal.
Like, that is not an excuse.
I live in the NJ/NYC metro area and spend a fair amount of time in Boston. I use public transit directions all the time. Just not Google's. Even Google Maps was shitty for transit directions compared to specialized apps like iTrans or Embark. I mean, you can't even see individual train lines, and bus directions are even worse. It's okay in a pinch, but if you live somewhere with public transit, it'd be silly to not have a local transit app.
I know what you're saying, but if both were available, that would do no good. The purpose is to get people using the new app and collect usage data and take in their bug reports. If they just left the old app around, that would minimize the number of people actually using the new one.
That's just it. It won't get more polished until everyone starts using it. Just like Gmaps started getting phenomenally better after 2007 when iPhones and Android phones started shipping with it.
But it's so bad that people aren't going to use it. I'm not. If I can't trust it to give me the right directions, I'm not using it. I'll use the browser version of Google Maps until they release an app.
I sincerely doubt that most people aren't using it. My entire family is fucking bananas over the turn-by-turn stuff, as a small-sample-size counterpoint.
True, I forget about turn by turn because I don't drive. I walk, bike, and take transit, and Apple maps is pretty useless for me.
It's a pretty clear case of not being able to please everybody. I drive a lot for work, and for far turn-by-turn has proven immensely useful for me (and aside from being about one block off one time, the directions have been nearly perfect so far). At the moment, I'd absolutely take the new app in its current state over the old Google-backed maps app without turn-by-turn. Obviously that's not true for everyone, and I'm not trying to claim it is, just that it's the first step in a long process that has to be taken at some point, otherwise it's just another year of further lagging behind what Google allows Maps on Android to do, while losing another year of real user-feedback on their own app.
Most people I know use the directions for cars secondary. Public transit is a huge fricking deal.
Like, that is not an excuse.
I live in the NJ/NYC metro area and spend a fair amount of time in Boston. I use public transit directions all the time. Just not Google's. Even Google Maps was shitty for transit directions compared to specialized apps like iTrans or Embark. I mean, you can't even see individual train lines, and bus directions are even worse. It's okay in a pinch, but if you live somewhere with public transit, it'd be silly to not have a local transit app.
Google just had a template that any public transport company could fill in and their transport data would be integrated into maps. That's purely an issue of your transport providers.
I know what you're saying, but if both were available, that would do no good. The purpose is to get people using the new app and collect usage data and take in their bug reports. If they just left the old app around, that would minimize the number of people actually using the new one.
That's just it. It won't get more polished until everyone starts using it. Just like Gmaps started getting phenomenally better after 2007 when iPhones and Android phones started shipping with it.
But it's so bad that people aren't going to use it. I'm not. If I can't trust it to give me the right directions, I'm not using it. I'll use the browser version of Google Maps until they release an app.
I sincerely doubt that most people aren't using it. My entire family is fucking bananas over the turn-by-turn stuff, as a small-sample-size counterpoint.
True, I forget about turn by turn because I don't drive. I walk, bike, and take transit, and Apple maps is pretty useless for me.
It's a pretty clear case of not being able to please everybody. I drive a lot for work, and for far turn-by-turn has proven immensely useful for me (and aside from being about one block off one time, the directions have been nearly perfect so far). At the moment, I'd absolutely take the new app in its current state over the old Google-backed maps app without turn-by-turn. Obviously that's not true for everyone, and I'm not trying to claim it is, just that it's the first step in a long process that has to be taken at some point, otherwise it's just another year of further lagging behind what Google allows Maps on Android to do, while losing another year of real user-feedback on their own app.
Most people I know use the directions for cars secondary. Public transit is a huge fricking deal.
Like, that is not an excuse.
I live in the NJ/NYC metro area and spend a fair amount of time in Boston. I use public transit directions all the time. Just not Google's. Even Google Maps was shitty for transit directions compared to specialized apps like iTrans or Embark. I mean, you can't even see individual train lines, and bus directions are even worse. It's okay in a pinch, but if you live somewhere with public transit, it'd be silly to not have a local transit app.
Google just had a template that any public transport company could fill in and their transport data would be integrated into maps. That's purely an issue of your transport providers.
How convenient that when Google's data is bad, it isn't their fault.
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
Posts
This isn't some inconvienence, like oh noes I have to borrow a USB floppy driver because I'm ten years behind the rest of the world. This is "Hey, we had this great maps app that worked, and never really got you lost, but we replaced it with this other maps app that's going to get you lost and has huge data holes...but hey, it might be better someday!"
You keep comparing in to floppy drives, and it's a very silly comparison. The world had moved to laser media a decade before the iMac did away with the floppy.
2. "Apple's best interest" is never something I've disagreed with. I'm talking about the users' best interests, though.
3. I don't think so, because there are other similar apps, and the contract with Google is still ongoing, right? So it's not like anything changed, Apple's just choosing not to take advantage of what they have, yes? If I'm wrong, though, that would be a good point.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
He's talking about having it pre-loaded. As in, their original GMaps app.
You're asking why they don't have it on the App Store, which is because the original app wasn't made by Google, but by Apple, with Google's input. So, I'm guessing the terms of their agreement currently require Apple to either have it pre-loaded, but not giving them the ability to throw it up on the store as a standalone.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Where did I give Apple too much credit or blame Google in what I just said? And its kind of laughable when you do the total opposite, and claim that Google couldn't have possibly have had any part in the existing app not being on the store.
Most business agreements cover shit like this--their API deal was likely ridiculously specific in order to make the deal acceptable cost-wise. If you think it was all loose and "Well, do whatever you want, we'll just sit back and relax" then you're being a goose.
I should clarify that I was referring to built-in, stock iOS apps in points 1 & 3. But, points taken.
Most of this would be easily resolved if Google released a decent version of their own Maps app. And even better if they actually put it on par with the Android version, which isn't something they've been willing to allow yet.
Also: regarding Tom Tom. Last time I used one a couple years back (it came in a rental car) for directions, shit was pretty badly out of date and just plain wrong a lot (in Boston). Particularly stores. It couldn't find a Trader Joes that had been there for 5+ years, among plenty of other little problems. I think Apple has taken most of that data and tried to supplement it with data from Yelp, Waze, and others, but obviously, they all have a good bit of work to do to be on par with Google. Thing is, I honestly believe it's a good thing to have at least one quality alternative to Gmaps, just like I believe Android's presence makes iOS a better operating system. I hate to sound like a broken record with this "long term" stuff, but some competing mapping services that are REALLY serious about it will only benefit users of ALL mapping services down the road.
I get why Apple wanted their own Maps, but their choice in implementing it, and releasing it with a very incomplete data set, was very hamfisted, and very un-Apple like.
Just to put it on the table, these are some things we do know almost for certain:
Apple's agreement with Google ends next year.
Google has reportedly been trying to get Apple to agree to allow them access to private user data for Maps users in the renewal.
Google has also apparently been bargaining to integrate Latitude into Maps on the next agreement.
Google has still refused to allow Apple access to turn-by-turn via the API.
I apologize for not having my sources handy, but most of these have been reported by the NY Times or the WSJ. Now, I'm not saying Google is evil for these demands (on the contrary, it makes the most sense for them and their own Android users), but I think anyone could see how Apple might want to seriously look into cutting ties and building their own solution that allows them to improve the experience as they see fit, rather than catering to Google's vision of how things should work.
If that were actually true, their Gmail app wouldn't be a piece of shit on iOS, and they would have agreed to let the iOS Gmaps app have access to turn-by-turn directions.
Look, if I were Google, I'd make sure Android had the better experience with their services, too, but to claim that they're equal across all platforms is bullshit.
Apple just wasn't willing to pay the price google wanted
Do you know of any turn by turn service using Google's turn by turn, other than Google? No.
And the reason the Gmail app on iOS is bad is because it's not needed, and thus Google has spent so little time maintaining it. Everyone that uses an iPhone just uses Mail, which has a Gmail adapter. Google had zero incentive to improve that app, so they just didn't. Now if Gmail itself was missing features when used from iOS, you'd have a point, but it's not.
That's kind of my point. They flat-out don't allow the same capabilities across platforms, while claiming that they would never block mapping from non-Google platforms. Maybe I'm just not understanding the distinction here, but it sounds pretty doublespeak-ish.
Edit: unless, of course, they release their own app on iOS that is on par with their Android app. But until then, I just can't help but see that claim as bullshit.
I offered my personal experience in a post above:
This applies to search and mail as well. For instance, what search engine does Siri use right now? That would be Google. Google could, if it wanted to, say "No, Siri is not allowed to make voice searches, because we have our own voice search technology that competes", but they won't do that.
This brings up a great point, re Siri: Is Apple going to have Siri use another search engine soon too? Since they seem to be in this "Get rid of Google, no matter how much it fucks users" mode. Will I suddently find Siri using Yahoo or SearchBuddy or some other shit beause Apple wants to be cranky pants?
I'll go back and edit my original post so I don't look like a goose for asking the same thing twice.
Yeah, I wonder about the double standards placed on Google and Apple here in this case. Google Maps in iOS was definitely feature-deficient, no turn-by-turn, Street View, etc (edit: I was wrong, iOS did have Street View). Obviously Google withheld those features for various reasons, so when Apple didn't want to play ball also for various reasons, it's Apple's fault only?
Another thing that is interesting is this whole Apple still having another year left in the deal thing. It makes it sound like Google wasn't prepared for Apple to drop this deal, otherwise they would have an iOS version of Google Maps all ready to go like the YouTube app. So there's definitely some motives for Google here, in not having an iOS version of Google Maps. It's pretty much all on them at this point.
Regarding Siri: I kind of doubt it. I could see an option in settings to swap to Bing or Yahoo, but Search is one area in which Apple has no apparent interest in trying to compete. They've added alternate search engines to Safari, but they've never removed Google. I think the popularity of Google for search eclipses Google Maps so much that they'd have to be really boneheaded to try to cut that out.
See related Safari screenshot:
They make it easy to switch, but Google is still right there in the prominent position.
Yeah, that's the thing with GPS devices, they're usually perfectly fine if you give them a precise address (as is the new Maps app), but their POI database is typically fucking awful, which is something we're used to being MUCH better because of Google's extension POI database.
Yeah I don't think Apple is looking to get into search, but Siri's default search engines start with Wolfram-Alpha, right? Siri also uses different search services like Yelp, OpenTable, and Yahoo! Sports, depending on the kind of search. It's only when those searches return no results that Siri offers to search the web (with Google) for you.
* The pre-iOS 5 Maps app was not a Google product. Apple wrote that, it simply linked in to Google's API.
* Turn-by-turn is the only feature Google ever "stopped" Apple from using, and as I've pointed out, turn-by-turn isn't a feature of the Google Maps Web API, it's an actual Android library.
* Any feature that was missing that isn't turn-by-turn, was missing because Apple didn't add it.
All Apple was ever using was Google's Data.
As a side note, Apple could have written a turn by turn engine using Google's data....that's how Motion X does it. It uses Google's map data, but it's own turn-by-turn engine. In the same vein, Apple could have given us a map data chooser just like Safari has.
Ah, I'll remove that line then. I just assumed it wasn't there since someone said it wasn't. I never looked myself.
Like, it wasn't this morning, and now it is, so there is definitely something that is LOOSE that shouldn't be. If it were a design decision, it would have rattled out of the box, yeah?
And it's not a loose sleep/volume/home/mute button - I've tried holding those and shaking and the rattle persists.
Ugh, I really don't want to have to take it in. My nearest Apple store is like a 20m walk from work, which nukes my lunch hour.
Whoops, corrected.
Play some sound through the built in speaker, see if it rattles really bad. Just a random thought, because my Nexus 7 showed up with a blown speaker and it rattled.
I highly doubt rattling is a design decision. Sounds like you have something loose or broken.
The Nike+ equipment at my gym doesn't seem to like my iOS 6 phone at all. Guess I'm keeping the iPod touch on iOS 5 for now.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/167550/iphoneipodipad-thread-the-headphone-jack-is-going-to-be-on-the-bottom-pow
Address I'm trying to get directions to. Gmaps directs me to a field with a couple power line towers to the right of the actual place. :P
Apple Maps takes me to the car dealership on the left of the actual place.
Most people I know use the directions for cars secondary. Public transit is a huge fricking deal.
Like, that is not an excuse.
Satans..... hints.....
I live in the NJ/NYC metro area and spend a fair amount of time in Boston. I use public transit directions all the time. Just not Google's. Even Google Maps was shitty for transit directions compared to specialized apps like iTrans or Embark. I mean, you can't even see individual train lines, and bus directions are even worse. It's okay in a pinch, but if you live somewhere with public transit, it'd be silly to not have a local transit app.
Crossposting this over to the new thread: http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/167550/iphoneipodipad-thread-the-headphone-jack-is-going-to-be-on-the-bottom-pow
That is not the fault of google maps.
Google just had a template that any public transport company could fill in and their transport data would be integrated into maps. That's purely an issue of your transport providers.
Satans..... hints.....
How convenient that when Google's data is bad, it isn't their fault.
I remember trying out and recommending this new "google" thing, for example