or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hiring developers to work on widely-criticized iOS 6 Maps
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple hiring developers to work on widely-criticized iOS 6 Maps - Page 3

post #81 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

GREAT NEWS ! But why did they wait for the OS to come out? Didn't they realize it was bad by themselves? Is this a sign that they are too close-minded?
The picture used as an example here shows what is actually the smallest problem with maps, and this kind of artifact actually doesn't bother me at all (I don't care if I don't see under a bridge on a highway). IMO flyover is almost perfect, the next versions will load faster and be more detailed, so I'm not worried by that. The biggest problem are just the basic maps and the search engine.


Great news?!!  Are you insane?  Why wasn't this done years ago?  For what we're paying, we're getting an incomplete product.  Jobs would never have let this happen.  This is pure unadulterated bs.

post #82 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by yu119995 View Post

Jobs would never have let this happen.  This is pure unadulterated bs.

Actually they are most likely acting on one of Jobs last directives. Get rid of Google on iOS whatever the cost. Apple is taking some hits on this and probably not handling it as elegantly as they usually do, but this is entirely a Jobs approved mission.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #83 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

tekstud? Is that you?

More like Blackintosh, I'd say. This one's posts are more blunt-force stupid.
post #84 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?

 

I can't speak for the entire planet but it's significantly worse in the UK. That's fact not opinion. It's missing major train stations, the names of bars appear on the map before train station names as you zoom in, a lot of maps are black and white, a lot of maps are obscured by clouds. Even Google Maps v1.0 seven years ago didn't have a lot of these problems.

 

It's really basic stuff that could have been sorted by hiring an intern in London for a couple of months prior to release. I hope that Apple builds up a network of 'scouts' around the world to fix these issues and keep Apple up-to-date with local information.

post #85 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Bart View Post

Dick you dont know my qualifications, trust me Scott Forstall must be sacked. His reputation is shot and he is the laughing stock of the industry.

I know your qualifications. You started out your career here at AI by suggesting that Apple buy Facebook, and touting Mark Zuckerburg as the next Steve Jobs.

Carry on, we're not listening.
post #86 of 175

Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, the new maps is bs in regards to content. I don't say this to hate on Apple, but when a company does something bad, I want them to know about it, otherwise they have no motivation to improve. They should've allowed for a year where the native google apps stuck around, sans turn by turn, along side the apple maps and NEXT year (iOS7), when apple maps would have the data it needs, then it would fly solo. This however was just plain dumb, and I hope that it is a reflection of conditions outside of their control (contract options with google) and not a sign of myopic, dim-witted decision making on the part of Apple execs. That said, I hope they don't just improve to fix bugs. I hope they swing for the fences and have it offer all the data/features (maybe not street view) that Google offers and more but in a faster, more user friendly iteration. Push the envelope guys... you've got the cash. On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over. I love your OS X, but I refuse to be forced into paying extortionist prices for ram and SSD (which are inferior)... I'll pay a premium for the apple computer but I want the freedom to extend it's life with basic upgrades later. Your computers are really nice but they aren't precious jewels that your users dare not open... and that's coming from a dedicated apple fan. 

post #87 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's? 
There are several distinct functions within the maps app which can't all be generalized together as better or worse than Google. People use the app for different purposes. I use it for two main features. One, transit directions and schedules which we all know is missing. Two, for aerial views as I'm searching for land to buy. This feature is one that I find most disappointing because it has nothing to do with hiring more developers or getting data sorted. It is just plain and simple a matter of dollars. Apple did not spend the money on licensing high quality current imagery. No amount of work will fix this, only money, and they have plenty. They just decided to not buy the good stuff and instead patched together images form different sources and did some fake colorizing and blending. In my opinion it was a wasted effort.

The anomalies in the 3D rendering are indicative of the overall approach they have taken. They tried to program their way out of having to spend money. You cannot duplicate thousands of camera vehicles on the road for several years with a few thousand lines lines of code. You cannot replace thousands of hours of aircraft photography with some 3D generated models. Their bet did not pan out. This entire line of thinking needs to be rethought. They don't need more engineers they need boots on the ground and planes in the air.

Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?

I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.

As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.

The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #88 of 175
Originally Posted by London Dude View Post
THIRD screw-up in a row. Let's not forget the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. Unlike that time, it will take Apple a long time to fix Maps.

 

Yeah, you people sure do love to lie, don't you?

 

So I can laugh at it, what was the second one? 


Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post
You are delusional.

 

Calling that out specifically… hmm…


Originally Posted by msalganik View Post
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way…

 

 

On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over.

 

Better just go buy a PC now. You don't get it.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #89 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by tylerk36 View Post

I noticed that Yahoo had an article on the new iPhone 5 and iOS 6 and its maps app. I noticed in that Yahoo article that a person posted the battery charge was significantly less on their iPhone since they upgraded to iOS6 from 5.1.1 on their iPhone 4s. I noticed that very same problem on my iPhone 4s. My battery used to last two days. Now it runs low in 8 hours on the same usage habits.
The map app seems to run allot slower and doesn't load as well as the old one in iOS 5.1.1. Didn't Apple foresee this? Really didn't they test this out without major issues arising.
In Steve JObs day he would probably go to the department that was responsible and cuss them out or fire them all.

Oh, please stop with the 'if Steve were still alive' crap. You even remember what OS X was like on its first release?
post #90 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?
I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.
As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.
The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.

TomTom offers vector maps to it's licensees like Apple as does OpenStreetMaps. Competing map platforms from Nokia/Navteq and Google are also natively vector. That Google maps on iOS have been restricted to bitmapped images is an anomaly, perhaps due to Apple restrictions... or perhaps not.

 

Anyway as Tomtom has been quick to point out (once the complaints started), while they stand behind the quality of the map data they've sold to Apple, it's Apple's job to figure out how to properly use it as they didn't buy any support or development to go along with it. Of course TomTom has extended an offer to Apple to come into their house and fix things for them. I don't expect Apple to take them up on the offer, at least publicly, and I personally doubt they have the resources to take the project on anyway. TT has it's own issues to deal with.


Edited by Gatorguy - 9/21/12 at 8:34am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #91 of 175

This morning was the first time I used voice-assisted, turn-by-turn GPS directions ever, on any device, because it was free, easy, and present on my iPhone.

post #92 of 175
Quote:

"Better just go buy a PC now. You don't get it."

 

 

Me wanting to be able to upgrade RAM and HDD on my own is not getting? Those are basics and Apple has had it on most of their computers for a while. Heck i just bought a new computer from them that still offers that option! I don't mind the other stuff being non-upgradable, and I do like Apples approach for hardware/software integration.. its the whole reason I own an Apple and not a PC. The decision to prevent RAM and HDD upgrades however stinks of profiteering and not any real design agenda. The whole "you don't get it" line just makes Apple users look like assholes, so for the sake of those of us (and I believe it to be the majority of Apple users) who like the company but aren't afraid to criticize once in a while, please keep your snobbish attitude to yourself. A company needs feedback in order to keep providing customers with what they want. Yes, Apple also redefines the rules sometimes and gives people something they didn't even know they wanted... that great, but the upgradability of HDD and RAM is NOT one of those instances.

post #93 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by msalganik View Post

Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, ..

 

Translation:

 

Quote:
Well I am a troll... I'm going to tell you I own a bunch of Apple products to "prove" that I'm not an Apple-hating troll. That out of the way, I'm going to spew a bunch of crap about how much Apple sucks and how evil they are. And, I'll repeat that I'm really a big Apple fan, even though the rest of my post talks about how much I hate them, because you won't be able to criticize me if I'm a big Apple fan.
post #94 of 175
Originally Posted by msalganik View Post
…stinks of profiteering and not any real design agenda.

 

And this proves it.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #95 of 175

Google first announced plans to begin monetizing Google Maps nearly a year ago, including a requirement that any new services forward display advertising in Google Maps along to their end users, so Google could start generating advertising revenue from the service. The hammer truly dropped in October 2011, when Google finally revealed pricing for Google Maps services. Lightweight usage was still free — subject to terms of service, of course. However, significant load volumes would begin to incur charges: basically, services and applications that generated more 25,000 map loads per day would be charged $40 to $10 for every additional 1,000 map loads.

 

<snip>

 

 

 

 

What will the future bring? It’s safe to say that Google is going to continue to push to monetize Google Maps and bank on the substantial investment it has made to develop the service. That’s probably not going to mean higher fees for apps and services to use Google Maps; however, it’s more likely that Google will continue to tweak terms of service so users of Google Maps will increasingly have to accept advertising from Google pushed along with Google Map content.



Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/why-are-companies-defecting-from-google-maps/#ixzz277U5Xghq

 

Seems like the only people who don't worry about Google monetizing Google Maps by increasing advertising and mining their personal information for marketing purposes are the trolls that are getting paid by Google and Android manufacturers to jump online and raise a ruckus.

post #96 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by elehcdn View Post

Google first announced plans to begin monetizing Google Maps 
nearly a year ago
, including a requirement that any new services forward display advertising in Google Maps along to their end users, so Google could start generating advertising revenue from the service. The hammer truly dropped in October 2011, when Google finally revealed pricing for Google Maps services. Lightweight usage was still free — subject to terms of service, of course. However, significant load volumes would begin to 
incur charges
: basically, services and applications that generated more 25,000 map loads per day would be charged $40 to $10 for every additional 1,000 map loads.

 





 



 



 



 



What will the future bring? It’s safe to say that Google is going to continue to push to monetize Google Maps and bank on the substantial investment it has made to develop the service. That’s probably not
 going to mean higher fees for apps and services to use Google Maps; however, it’s more likely that Google will continue to tweak terms of service so users of Google Maps will increasingly have to accept advertising from Google pushed along with Google Map content.


Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/why-are-companies-defecting-from-google-maps/#ixzz277U5Xghq

Seems like the only people who don't worry about Google monetizing Google Maps by increasing advertising and mining their personal information for marketing purposes are the trolls that are getting paid by Google and Android manufacturers to jump online and raise a ruckus.

Well this certainly is a fiasco! First they lose Google search as the default in the Safari browser. Then they lose the YouTube app on iOS 6. Finally, they lose the maps app on iOS 6. Everyone knows that Google gets most of its mobile income from Apple devices.

This is all due to the greed of Google and Larry Page. Larry's reputation is shot and he should be fired immediately.

/s
Edited by Dick Applebaum - 9/21/12 at 9:44am
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #97 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Anyway as Tomtom has been quick to point out (once the complaints started), while they stand behind the quality of the map data they've sold to Apple, it's Apple's job to figure out how to properly use it as they didn't buy any support or development to go along with it.

So Apple went in to the data base and renamed towns, streets and landmarks, put dining and shopping icons on stores that no longer exist? Why would Apple do that? Not saying that Apple hasn't made many errors in execution of the new maps but the data is supposed to be correct to begin with.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #98 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

So Apple went in to the data base and renamed towns, streets and landmarks, put dining and shopping icons on stores that no longer exist? Why would Apple do that? Not saying that Apple hasn't made many errors in execution of the new maps but the data is supposed to be correct to begin with.

The underlying data could be generally, even perfectly, correct yet still misapplied or improperly translated once Apple's team combined it with other elements from separate sources.

 

I've no idea how Apple went about assembling their maps, the expertise of their mapping team, nor the source and extent of the underlying data they've used for various specific map segments. They've integrated more than a dozen sources for various features and functions and combined them into a single application. It's obvious that some mapping. POI's or other information hasn't been properly applied somewhere in the process. The source of those errors isn't being owned up to by anyone as far as I've seen, tho in the end it's Apple's problem to solve. I simply repeated what Tomtom had to say about it.

http://www.reuters.com/www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/21/us-tomtom-apple-maps-idUSBRE88K0PT20120921

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/21/tomtom-apple-maps-idINL5E8KLHPX20120921


Edited by Gatorguy - 9/21/12 at 10:07am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #99 of 175

@Anonymouse and Tallest Skil - just wow. You just picked out the part where I criticize Apple and throw everything else out as garbage.... so is that supposed to mean that Apple can do no wrong or that if you buy their product you can't criticize them. What kind of fantasy world do you live in.... or are you guys actually paid trolls yourselves?

post #100 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by msalganik View Post

@Anonymouse and Tallest Skil - just wow. You just picked out the part where I criticize Apple and throw everything else out as garbage.... so is that supposed to mean that Apple can do no wrong or that if you buy their product you can't criticize them. What kind of fantasy world do you live in.... or are you guys actually paid trolls yourselves? That said... I do hope you get paid for this, otherwise that would mean you're quite pathetic. 

 

Actually, I picked out your entire post as garbage, just so we're clear on that.

post #101 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Anyway as Tomtom has been quick to point out (once the complaints started), while they stand behind the quality of the map data they've sold to Apple, it's Apple's job to figure out how to properly use it as they didn't buy any support or development to go along with it.

So Apple went in to the data base and renamed towns, streets and landmarks, put dining and shopping icons on stores that no longer exist? Why would Apple do that? Not saying that Apple hasn't made many errors in execution of the new maps but the data is supposed to be correct to begin with.

 

I've been doing some checking...

 

Apparently TomTom has a proprietary database format that they don't reveal -- even to licensees like Apple.

 

iOS 6 Maps uses OSM (Open Street Maps) format.

 

Apparently, the conversion between TomTom and and OSM is not an exact science.

 

 

Now, here is a case where you may be proven right... If Apple saved some money by not buying any development or support from TomTom.

 

Knowing Apple, though, I bet it was more of an ego thing than doing it on the cheap -- the money savings was just a bonus!

 

The Apple I've known for 34 years thinks that:

  1. anything can be done in software
  2. hardware is just a means to showcase the software
  3. they are better at software than anyone else *

 

So, I can envision someone like Scott Forestall and/or his minions saying "Support? Support? We don't need no stinkin' support!".

 

* They seem to be right more than 80% of the time

 

The story goes that Apple was considering buying Commodore for the superior (at the time) Amiga hardware. Steve, Bill Atkinson and a few others were given a run-through by Commodore...  Atkinson was heard to remark "We can do that in software"...

 

Edit: There are some database formats out there based on XML.  I wouldn't be surprised if TomTom or OSM (or both) have an XML database... or XML is used in the conversion process.

 

XML has several weaknesses!  One of the worst is that you can slap together something quickly without really considering overall design, additional future capabilities, etc.  What happens, over time, is you get a can of worms -- where you are afraid to change anything... you just add a new substructure.  Misnamed and misplaced items could easily occur if you don't understand the intricacies of a complex XML structure.

 

 

 

Edit 2:  The more I think about it, I can almost  visualize what is happening:

 

  1. An iOS 6 device makes a map request to Apple's Cloud servers
  2. Apple's Cloud servers make a request  to TomTom's Map servers (locally or remotely)
  3. TomTom returns XML containing the requested  map data
  4. Apple's servers parse the XML and combine it with OSM Data
  5. Apple's servers format the results for efficient transmission to the iOS 6 device
  6. The iOS 6 Maps app generates the map

 

Steps 3 & 4,  likely are the problem areas...  I'm surmising that the XML packet contains some oddball data (like  a revised name or location that should replace the prior data (in the same XML packet).  Apple doesn't know how to handle this -- so it just ignores it and sends the original (erroneous) data back to the iOS 6 Maps app... Where it is presented in all its glory


Edited by Dick Applebaum - 9/21/12 at 11:07am
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #102 of 175
Originally Posted by msalganik View Post
What kind of fantasy world do you live in.... or are you guys actually paid trolls yourselves?

 

We live in the fantasy world where people stay on topic, do research before whining about something they don't understand, and don't have to pretend to put up a defensive barrier of "ownership" or "fanhood" to hide their trolling.

 

We like to call it Reality.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #103 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I've been doing some checking...

 

Apparently TomTom has a proprietary database format that they don't reveal -- even to licensees like Apple.

 

iOS 6 Maps uses OSM (Open Street Maps) format.

 

Apparently, the conversion between TomTom and and OSM is not an exact science.

 

 

Now, here is a case where you may be proven right... If Apple saved some money by not buying any development or support from TomTom.

 

Knowing Apple, though, I bet it was more of an ego thing than doing it on the cheap -- the money savings was just a bonus!

 

The Apple I've known for 34 years thinks that:

  1. anything can be done in software
  2. hardware is just a means to showcase the software
  3. they are better at software than anyone else *

 

[...]

Edit: There are some database formats out there based on XML.  I wouldn't be surprised if TomTom or OSM (or both) have an XML database... or XML is used in the conversion process.

 

XML has several weaknesses!  One of the worst is that you can slap together something quickly without really considering overall design, additional future capabilities, etc.  What happens, over time, is you get a can of worms -- where you are afraid to change anything... you just add a new substructure.  Misnamed and misplaced items could easily occur if you don't understand the intricacies of a complex XML structure.

First law of enterprise level database design is abstraction layer from the very beginning. If they bought a database without abstraction in an unknown table structure then they deserve every criticism they are receiving.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #104 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilution View Post

Apple maps V1 was never going to compete with Google maps V7 as Google have had 8 years head start but I bet it doesn't take Apple more than a year to catch up.
Agreed.

However, Apple has more money than God (yes this is hyperbole not an attempt to state facts), so they only throw money at the problem AFTER they release the software as their key app promoting iOS 6?

http://www.apple.com/ios/whats-new/

I find it hard to believe Apple didn't know the inadequacies of the software before the launch. Why didn't they throw this money at the problem a year ago when they decided to compete with Google? Why is it still promoted as possibly "the most beautiful, Powerful mapping service ever"?

http://www.apple.com/ios/maps

In the meantime, I will use maps.google.com, and/or look for another app while Apple gets their act together, but considering what was hinged on his launch, this was a huge misstep for Apple. Sorry, that's how I see it. Perhaps in a year Apple will have worked out the bugs enough to make the claim it is the most "powerful" maps app ever, but for now Google, Samsung, Microsoft and the rest are having a good laugh ... And a lot of consumers are re-considering their iPhone purchase.

And that is the REAL PROBLEM, not whether users can find suitable workarounds, but that Android and Microsoft now have some ammunition to get a stronger foothold for their deficient platforms. Look, consumers by and large are rarely loyal. They want cheap, feature rich products that do whatever they need done well (why else would Apple try to compete with other platforms on price considering they offer a superior product?) Map software is probably the most utilized and relied upon app on any phone, after the basic commnication apps, and if that doesn't work correctly for them, then what good are all the other bells and whistles? Hopefully I am wrong ...
Edited by Mac_128 - 9/21/12 at 11:31am
post #105 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by yu119995 View Post


Great news?!!  Are you insane?  Why wasn't this done years ago?  For what we're paying, we're getting an incomplete product.  Jobs would never have let this happen.  This is pure unadulterated bs.

 

It's called sarcasm.  Look it up.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post


Agreed.
However, Apple has more money than God (yes this is hyperbole not an attempt to state facts), so they only throw money at the problem AFTER they release the software as their key app promoting iOS 6?
http://www.apple.com/ios/whats-new/
I find it hard to believe Apple didn't know the inadequacies of the software before the launch. Why didn't they throw this money at the problem a year ago when they decided to compete with Google? Why is it still promoted as possibly "the most beautiful, Powerful mapping service ever"?
http://www.apple.com/ios/maps
In the meantime, I will use maps.google.com, and/or look for another app while Apple gets their act together, but considering what was hinged on his launch, this was a huge misstep for Apple. Sorry, that's how I see it. Perhaps in a year Apple will have worked out the bugs enough to make the claim it is the most "powerful" maps app ever, but for now Google, Samsung, Microsoft and the rest are having a good laugh ... And a lot of consumers are re-considering their iPhone purchase.

 

 

One does have to wonder how it could be such a nightmare.  To be fair, it does seem much worse outside the U.S.  Perhaps their international maps just didn't get that much attention.  As I posted earlier, it actually works great for me.  Faster, cleaner, crisper.  Then again, I'm in suburban Philly.  It seems like location is a big variable.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #106 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I've been doing some checking...

 

Apparently TomTom has a proprietary database format that they don't reveal -- even to licensees like Apple.

 

iOS 6 Maps uses OSM (Open Street Maps) format.

 

Apparently, the conversion between TomTom and and OSM is not an exact science.

 

 

Now, here is a case where you may be proven right... If Apple saved some money by not buying any development or support from TomTom.

 

Knowing Apple, though, I bet it was more of an ego thing than doing it on the cheap -- the money savings was just a bonus!

 

The Apple I've known for 34 years thinks that:

  1. anything can be done in software
  2. hardware is just a means to showcase the software
  3. they are better at software than anyone else *

 

[...]

Edit: There are some database formats out there based on XML.  I wouldn't be surprised if TomTom or OSM (or both) have an XML database... or XML is used in the conversion process.

 

XML has several weaknesses!  One of the worst is that you can slap together something quickly without really considering overall design, additional future capabilities, etc.  What happens, over time, is you get a can of worms -- where you are afraid to change anything... you just add a new substructure.  Misnamed and misplaced items could easily occur if you don't understand the intricacies of a complex XML structure.

First law of enterprise level database design is abstraction layer from the very beginning. If they bought a database without abstraction in an unknown table structure then they deserve every criticism they are receiving.

 

I agree... but they didn't buy a database they bought continuous access to a database!   I suspect that XML is used for the abstraction layer, and therein lies the problem.  I added some edits to the post and I'll repeat them here:

 

Quote:

Edit 2:  The more I think about it, I can almost  visualize what is happening:

 

  1. An iOS 6 device makes a map request to Apple's Cloud servers
  2. Apple's Cloud servers make a request  to TomTom's Map servers (locally or remotely)
  3. TomTom returns XML containing the requested  map data
  4. Apple's servers parse the XML and combine it with OSM Data
  5. Apple's servers format the results for efficient transmission to the iOS 6 device
  6. The iOS 6 Maps app generates the map

 

Steps 3 & 4,  likely are the problem areas...  I'm surmising that the XML packet contains some oddball data (like  a revised name or location that should replace the prior data (in the same XML packet).  Apple doesn't know how to handle this -- so it just ignores it and sends the original (erroneous) data back to the iOS 6 Maps app... Where it is presented in all its glory

 

I haven't checked in a while but iTunes is/was based on an XML database -- when you did a query of the iTunes Store, XML was retrieved from the database, compressed and encrypted and sent to the iTunes app on your computer,  It was all terribly inefficient -- maybe that's why they are rewriting iTunes.

 

Back on topic:  A service like iTunes and (to a lesser degree) Maps is mostly forgiving -- if the client app does't understand the data (the XML doesn't parse) it can just be ignored -- the client app will just present what it can and//or make another request.   

 

I don't use turn-by-turn, but quite a few posters say that they have no problems with it.  This may be because the data comes from a different source or the structure and process is more rigorous than simply displaying names and places on a map.

 

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject FWIW!

"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #107 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

I agree... but they didn't buy a database they bought continuous access to a database!   I suspect that XML is used for the abstraction layer, and therein lies the problem.  I added some edits to the post and I'll repeat them here:

 

 

I haven't checked in a while but iTunes is/was based on an XML database -- when you did a query of the iTunes Store, XML was retrieved from the database, compressed and encrypted and sent to the iTunes app on your computer,  It was all terribly inefficient -- maybe that's why they are rewriting iTunes.

 

Back on topic:  A service like iTunes and (to a lesser degree) Maps is mostly forgiving -- if the client app does't understand the data (the XML doesn't parse) it can just be ignored -- the client app will just present what it can and//or make another request.   

 

I don't use turn-by-turn, but quite a few posters say that they have no problems with it.  This may be because the data comes from a different source or the structure and process is more rigorous than simply displaying names and places on a map.

 

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject FWIW!

I would doubt that Apple's servers are querying TT servers when an iOS user asks for mapping or routing. TomTom back-end servers haven't been all that reliable with frequent outages and connection failures, even rarely for a day or more. I'd be shocked if Apple relied on them directly and on-demand for any customer feature support.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #108 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

I agree... but they didn't buy a database they bought continuous access to a database!   I suspect that XML is used for the abstraction layer, and therein lies the problem.  I added some edits to the post and I'll repeat them here:

 

 

That really makes me wonder. They ditched dependency on Google only to be dependent on TomTom seems to point to the switch as to deprive Google of revenue and not so much about creating their own application. The reason Google maps are so good is because Google controls all the data. If Apple has to get data from multiple vendors in various formats and then continually convert it, how can they possibly catch up to Google. I would have thought they would buy the initial data and then take responsibility for maintaining and updating it so they were in complete control. I can see licensing imagery but I would think owning your data should be a high priority.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #109 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

I agree... but they didn't buy a database they bought continuous access to a database!   I suspect that XML is used for the abstraction layer, and therein lies the problem.  I added some edits to the post and I'll repeat them here:

 

 

That really makes me wonder. They ditched dependency on Google only to be dependent on TomTom seems to point to the switch as to deprive Google of revenue and not so much about creating their own application. The reason Google maps are so good is because Google controls all the data. If Apple has to get data from multiple vendors in various formats and then continually convert it, how can they possibly catch up to Google. I would have thought they would buy the initial data and then take responsibility for maintaining and updating it so they were in complete control. I can see licensing imagery but I would think owning your data should be a high priority.

 

Yeah, but TomTom is not a competitor to Apple (Apple is a competitor to TomTom).   So, I think that Tim and company are tired of underwriting competitors.  

 

But, I agree -- if Apple wants to be in the map business they should own the data and the means of gathering and updating it.  Maybe Apple should have just bought TomTom if they were the best non-competitive mapper out there!

"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #110 of 175
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #111 of 175

Dick, I fixed your link by making that "a" into a Cyrillic… whatever they call it. lol.gif

 

The link doesn't actually work still. The forum prevents all use of "9to5Mаc". Sorry.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #112 of 175

I've received Mike Dobson's articles for a few years now and always find him to have some good information and background data on the map-making industry as a whole, along with it's history. I was mildly surprised that mainstream press took notice today. Cartography is a area of little interest to most people.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #113 of 175

Well, as opposed to just bashing people back and forth, I'm going to give my opinion instead.

 

I'm both disappointed with elements of the new maps, but cautiously optimistic that it will end up being a huge step forwards.  The bad comes down to two things, firstly, not having transit times is a huge step backwards from Google Maps.  I know Apple say 3rd party developers will come and fix that, but having downloaded a couple of the apps they recommend when I tried a transit search, it's just not the same as having it in the same app.  I suspect Apple will end up re-thinking that one, and putting transit times in themselves.


The second bad thing I see is the traffic.  On Google Maps it was nice and clear, Green, Amber or Red, but on Apples effort it is far from clear what's going on.

 

However, on the plus side, it's readability as a map is streets ahead of Google.  I also like the fact that it's presenting whichever businesses are there as opposed to whichever nearby business has paid for prominence.  I appreciate there are some problems with locations being wrong, but again, I think they'll fix that.

 

So, at the moment I'd say it's hard to call it anything other than a disappointment in its current form, I think it represents a big enough improvement as a platform for them to be able to make some rapid improvements, that will ultimately lead to it being better than Google Maps.

post #114 of 175

There's no better way to tell Apple they missed the mark than to not use it.

post #115 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Map-gate, indeed.

One of these days, I swear, Apple is going to put a gate in their phone, and it'll have issues, and the press will dub it "Gate-gate," because they're bereft of imagination.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #116 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post
The bad comes down to two things, firstly, not having transit times is a huge step backwards from Google Maps.  I know Apple say 3rd party developers will come and fix that, but having downloaded a couple of the apps they recommend when I tried a transit search, it's just not the same as having it in the same app.  I suspect Apple will end up re-thinking that one, and putting transit times in themselves.

I totally agree with you.

Problem I have with Transit is not the directions part.  It's the lack of mapping out routes overlaid on the map.  Primarily Subway lines and station plans.  Google's plans are really great for traveling.  I don't need the phone to tell me which line to take, if the plan of the subway system is overlaid on the map.

 

The other problem with 3rd party apps is they are generally specific to one city.  So if you travel a lot (like I do) you have to have tones of apps (more then will fit in a folder) for all the different walking, biking, bus and subway apps you would need...none of which will work within the Maps App.

 

iFail

post #117 of 175

After playing with Apple's new Map application, I will say this. It is very fast at drawing maps, and at rerouting directions. In my limited tests, it has been accurate as well. 

post #118 of 175

Thanks for the article. I believe my thoughts on the matter were already in alignment with his assessment. I am sad that Apple screwed this up so badly, but I work with a lot of database stuff so I understand how these things can go haywire pretty easily. Perhaps his best idea was to set up some kind of crowd source and I might add that there is nothing wrong with looking at what Google is presenting for the same location once a user submits a correction request. But again I don't know how on earth they plan to fix data that they don't own except by augmenting it independently but that is just a bandaid on top of a kludge.


Edited by mstone - 9/21/12 at 1:10pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #119 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

There's no better way to tell Apple they missed the mark than to not use it.

 

 

Yes, except that would be stupid. Apple needs the data to improve it. Further, the application for 90 percent of the people is very good. As I said previously, it adds turn by turn, draws very fast, and re-routes quickly. It is beautiful to look at.

 

I suspect many people like myself didn't even use Google maps on the iPhone. I didn't. Google maps didn't have turn by turn, didn't draw fast, and didn't function like a typical GPS unit. I used Navigon. If Maps fails, I will switch between the two. 

post #120 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Thanks for the article. I believe my thoughts on the matter were already in alignment with his assessment. I am sad that Apple screwed this up so bad, but I work with a lot of database stuff so I understand how these things can go haywire pretty easily. Perhaps his best idea was to set up some kind of crowd source and I might add that there is nothing wrong with looking at what Google is presenting for the same location once a user submits a correction request.

 

 

Except I am still confused as to how Apple screwed things up so bad. It is a map of the whole freaking world. There are errors for some. I haven't seen any errors yet. I live int he US. Further, Apple has added user input controls. If something is wrong, report it. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hiring developers to work on widely-criticized iOS 6 Maps