or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by derekmorr

I've seen a lot of anecdotal reports about Apple's map quality. This is frustrating, since there's inconsistency in what one person tests vs another. I did find one attempt to quantify the accuracy of Apple's geocoder using city names in Ontario, Canada. The results aren't good: Apple returned correct data only 20% of the time. Certainly, there is much more to a map than the geocoder, but this is a pretty bad first start for Apple.
Um, this was just a regular imagery update for Google Maps. They post them all the time (earlier posts are here: http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/search/label/imagery). It has nothing to do with Apple Maps. Further, Google launched 45-degree imagery back in late 2009 - http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2009/12/changing-your-perspective.html. This isn't some new feature they just launched. They regulary add new cities -...
  No, not exactly. It does use the same WebCore and JavascriptCore that Mobile Safari uses (Apple requires this), but the network stack is different. For example, Chrome for iOS supports SPDY; Mobile Safari doesn't. See this great talk on WebKit internals for more specifics.    It's important to have browser diversity on a platform. iOS 6 improved Mobile Safari quite a bit but it did add some bugs. It's caching HTTP POST data in violation of the spec (more detail here),...
  There's no need to fix it at the source. OSM has excellent data for University Park, PA. For whatever reason Apple screwed it up.
  Thanks. I missed it with the small, gray-on-gray text.
  How should someone go about fixing a bug or missing data in Apple Maps? I don't see a way to report problems or submit new data?   I'm really curious what Apple did here. They said they use Open Street Map for some of the basemap data. In my town, OSM has great maps, but Apple's maps are empty and many of the POIs are missing. So even submitting bugfixes to OSM is no guarantee that Apple will pick them up.
That's really going off the deep-end.You're right. They can't call it Android if it doesn't pass the CTS (http://source.android.com/faqs.html#is-compatibility-mandatory) -- because it isn't Android if it isn't compatible. There's nothing in the Open Source Initiative's definition that requires open-source projects to let anyone use their trademarks, or companies to help their competitors.I find it rather curious that you care so much about Android since you apparently...
Amazon's Kindle Fire and Baidu's Yi product lines solidly refutes your argument. Android is open-source. But if a company joins an alliance and agrees not to ship incompatible variants, then they can't cry foul later.
I must admit, I'm in awe of (some) AI's commenter's abilities to spin anything to fit an anti-Google agenda.No, I mean back in 2009, when Acer voluntarily joined the Open Handset Alliance: http://www.acer-group.com/public/News/2009/20090601.htmNo, the OHA is not closed to Aliyun. In fact, Andy Rubin has asked Alibaba to join the OHA and said that they'd help Alibaba fix their Android compatibility issues:"So if you want to benefit from the Android ecosystem, then make the...
No, that's not at all what I'm saying.To repeat -- anyone can ship a product based on AOSP, or a modified version of AOSP. Alibaba is based on AOSP and has incompatible changes. However, Acer voluntarily agreed not to ship incompatible Android products when they joined the Open Handset Alliance. It's not bullying when Google points this out.If another vendor, which isn't part of OHA, wants to ship Alibaba-based devices, they're free to do so.
New Posts  All Forums: