or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › How Google was "skyhooked" by Apple's new iOS 6 Maps
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How Google was "skyhooked" by Apple's new iOS 6 Maps

post #1 of 106
Thread Starter 
Apple's surprise decision to launch its own Maps service in iOS 6 caught Google off guard in the same manner that Google turned the tables on Skyhook Wireless just two years ago.

Apple pulls the rug on Google's Maps



The announcement of Apple's new iOS 6 Maps at this summer's Worldwide Developer Convention took Google by surprise, because Apple still reportedly had a year remaining in its contract with Google to provide maps for iOS.

The surprise introduction of Apple's own Maps for iOS 6 gave Google very limited time to bring its own version of Maps to iOS. But Apple didn't just want to compete with Google. It wanted to show off an amazing Maps experience that raised the bar and would leave Google scrambling to port a good enough version of its own maps to compete with it.

Google faced the task of not just porting its existing Android Maps version to iOS, but improving upon its features and appearance to match Apple's own version. That would logically include matching the 3D features of Flyover, which Google already has in a limited fashion on iOS in the form of its Google Earth app.

Integrating Earth's 3D overview features into Maps Navigation would involve additional complication given that the two products draw from different code bases.

Google Earth also has the same kinds of 3D rendering glitches that Apple's Flyover has (the Golden Gate Bridge doesn't have a highway running beneath it as Earth's rendering suggests, below top, contrasted with Apple's Flyover view below it), making it impossible for Google to ridicule those kinds of errors without denigrating its own product at the same time.

iOS6Maps.92612.02.jpg


iOS6Maps.92612.03.jpg


Earth is also less detailed, and its images are older than Apple's. This Google Earth view of Doyle Drive in San Francisco (the Highway 101 approach to the Golden Gate Bridge) predates any construction, despite work having started in 2009. Apple's version shows advanced construction, although it too is several months old.

iOS6Maps.92612.01.jpg


iOS6Maps.92512.16.jpg


Additionally, all the work to produce a new Goggle Maps Navigation+Earth for iOS would need to be paid for by ads (just like Google's free Chrome browser or YouTube app for iOS), because few iOS users would be likely to pay anything substantial to replace Apple's own Maps with Google's version. In contrast, Apple's software development is funded through profitable hardware sales.

If Apple had given Google advanced notice of its intent to take Maps solo, Google could have devoted its efforts toward introducing its own Maps alternative that matched Apple's features and added more of its own right at the launch of iOS 6.

However, Apple's surprise announcement left Google with no recourse but to heap complaints upon Apple's new Maps while having nothing to offer as an alternative apart from its own limited web app. Meanwhile, iOS 6 immediately shifted users (and all third party apps) to Apple's own maps servers while Google was left vending its valuable information for free via in an inferior web-based interface.

By the time Google can release its own Maps app for iOS 6, Apple will have had months to work out its place name bugs and visual 3D glitches from its own version.

Additionally, millions of users will have grown accustomed to using Apple's revamped interface, its Siri integration, Yelp integration and its support for a range of novel third party routing apps to obtain everything from transit and water taxi routes to ride sharing services.

iOS6Maps.92512.3.jpg


Skyhooked on its own petard



How big of a deal is it for Apple to be getting (and Google to be losing) exclusive access to millions of iOS Maps users placing millions of queries and making millions of crowdsourced reports of traffic, place name corrections and other direct and/or automated feedback?

Consider that in early 2010, when Skyhook Wireless inked a deal with Motorola another Android licensees to use its own WiFi-based geolocation features in place of Google's Location Services, Android product manager Steve Lee stated, in emails revealed through subsequent court proceedings reported by the New York Times, that the deal "would be awful for Google because it will cut off our ability to continue collecting data to maintain and improve our location database."

Google subsequently informed its licenses that using Skyhook for their WiFi geolocation would invalidate their promise to uphold "Android compatibility," an opinion Motorola initially described as "unfounded." One month later however, Motorola informed Skyhook that their agreement had been terminated because of Google's determination that it "renders the device no longer Android Compatible."

Skyhook subsequently sued over Google's strong-arming to stop its geolocation service deal with Motorola, and additionally accused Google of stealing its technology. The real issue, Google's lawyers stated in response, was not Android compatibility but rather that Skyhook had infringed upon Google's "contractual rights to collect end-user data."

If Google felt threatened by a startup making deals with Samsung and Motorola on select Android smartphones, imagine how the company feels about instantly losing access to collect map queries and traffic data across tens of millions of Apple's iOS users.


Understanding the history behind mobile maps development at Apple and Google provides clear insight into not just why Apple created its own Maps for iOS 6, but also how likely the new app will be able to solve its various outstanding issues.

Apple's history with Google Maps has been widely distorted to the point where some pundits have incorrectly asserted that Google initially wrote the Maps app for iPhone, while others have announced that Apple will need to hire tens of thousands of employees just to match the staffing that produced Google's Maps (much of which has been devoted to laborious Street View photo collection efforts).

Because Apple's new Maps isn't a simple subject, the answers--and the important questions--regarding its outstanding issues are not simple either. Both require some background information about where they came from and why, and the business models that are intended to support them.

Google, leader of web maps



Google's dominant position in mobile maps originated with Apple, but when the iPhone first appeared in 2007, Google had already established its web-based maps as the leader in online mapping.

This was largely due to its novel use of AJAX web technologies to present and display easy to peruse maps and satellite imagery, a project that developed as an outgrowth of Google's 2004 acquisition of Where 2 Technologies.

Competing web-based map vendors simply couldn't match the complex layers of web kluge (complex JavaScript, iFrames, translucent PNG images and Adobe Flash) Google had created to force the humble web browser to work as a near desktop-quality mapping application.

In less than three years of Google Maps development, competing conventional web maps had all fallen behind to a very distant second place, leaving Google's web talents virtually uncontested. That made working with Google's Maps API a natural choice for Apple in developing the iPhone.

iOS6Maps.timeline.092612.jpg


Apple trades Java for Cocoa



However, Google's mobile maps strategy of 2006 was built around Java, which was at the time the nearly universal platform for cellphones capable of running any type of applets (Symbian, Windows Mobile, Palm and Blackberry could all run Java apps).

Apple wasn't interested in supporting Java on its new iPhone however, instead relying exclusively upon its own Cocoa Touch developer tools to deliver custom native apps that were essentially scaled down Mac apps (rather than Java middleware code running on a Virtual Machine hosted by the phone's core OS).

Rather than working with Google to build a custom web app for iPhone, Apple developed its own native Maps app for iPhone that obtained 2D street and satellite images using Google's open Maps APIs, along with driving, walking and transit directions that followed.

This allowed Apple to deliver a spectacular Maps experience unlike any ever seen before on a mobile device (compare Google's Maps for Mobile running on Windows Mobile in 2007, below).



Apple's new Maps application was so good it made Google's Java-based "Maps for Mobile" applets look downright clumsy in comparison.

The new Maps, alongside the iPhone's exceptional Safari mobile browser, Mail and other bundled apps, enabled Apple to trounce the overall experience other smartphone vendors were selling, resulting in a mad scramble by Nokia, RIM, Microsoft and Palm to overhaul their aging mobile platforms in feverous attempts to catch up.

Android takes its direction from iPhone



None of these mobile platform companies, which ruled the roost when iPhone debuted, are even considered serious contenders today. They were summarily replaced by Apple's iPhone and a new effort by Google to rebrand a revamped and optimized version of Java/Linux as "Android," an initiative that's younger than the original iPhone Maps app itself.

Google initially hoped to launch Android as a free alternative to Windows Mobile and as a more coherent replacement for Java/Linux (a fragmented mess of platforms where every manufacturers' phones had their own VM with more quirks and bugs to work around than a web browser in the late 1990s).

Android was planned to give Google a competitive footing in smartphones at a time when Microsoft was threatening to use the launch of Windows Vista to push Google and its web search right off the Windows PC desktop. While Microsoft was ultimately unsuccessful at taking Google's search business away on the PC, Google didn't want to take any chances at risking a similar threat in the rapidly emerging market for smartphones.

After seeing what Apple had done with iPhone however, Google began shifting its Android strategy to become the "open alternative" to iOS, attracting attention from developers and hobbyists that didn't like the idea of Apple's centralized control of apps and media on top of the company's "whole-widget" control of both the iPhone's hardware and OS software.

While initial releases of Android were largely limited to the hobbyist community, Apple's rapid ascent in smartphones enabled it to surpass Palm and Windows Mobile in its first two years on the market, while catching up to RIM's once blockbuster Blackberry business.

In the U.S., Verizon had grown concerned by Apple's exclusive partnership with AT&T. The iPhone had turned around Cingular, which had been a struggling confederation of GSM carriers, and relaunched it into a serious new nationwide mobile competitor rebranded as AT&T and armed with the world's most talked about smartphone.

By the end of 2009, Apple's iPhone had advanced to the point where Verizon had given up on RIM's efforts to match it with new Blackberry models. Instead, Verizon decided to partner with Google's Motorola licensee to launch Android 2.0, finally considered ready for mainstream use.

Verizon smartphone sales 2010


Unsurprisingly, the key feature of Android 2.0 was Google's new Maps Navigation, which leveraged Google's maps prowess to beat the iPhone in delivering built-in turn-by-turn directions with voice commands, local search and live traffic reports.

Google had also made it clear that it was competing against Apple, opening mocking the company while comparing it to North Korea, and in various respects presenting itself to its giddy audience of admirers as a hero that had already won the smartphone wars before even starting to battle.

At the same time, Google also expected Apple to continue helping it as a close partner in the mobile space, publicly stating that it expected Apple to quickly adopt Android 2.0's Maps Navigation features for use on the iPhone. That never happened however.

According to a report by John Paczkowski of the Wall Street Journal "All Things Digital" blog, while Google was publicly stating that it hoped Apple would adopt its Navigation features on iOS, it also wanted to keep voice navigation exclusive to Android, leaving Apple's platform in "a clear disadvantage in the mobile space."

Instead, Apple initiated a series of map-related acquisitions that made it obvious that it intended to develop its own mapping service independent from Google. Three years later, about the same period between Google's first map acquisition and the debut of widespread mobile maps, Apple introduced its own Maps for iOS 6.

This all happened before



This isn't the first time a technology company has started competing with a partner. Google itself left TeleAtlas in 2009 to rely upon its own maps, and broke ties with Skyhook after it had collected enough WiFi data to perform its own geolocation. It likely should have anticipated that Apple could do the same thing to it on iOS.

It certainly isn't new for Apple, either. When Microsoft stopped active development of Internet Explorer for Mac, Apple created its own Safari browser, and set up an open source project that now powers the overwhelming majority of mobile devices and has recently even surpassed Internet Explorer on the desktop.

When Microsoft let Office for Mac fall behind, Apple similarly launched its own iWork productivity suite, which has not only established itself on Mac (where it destroyed Microsoft's ability to charge up to $500 for regular Office updates), but has made its way to iOS to become the world's top grossing mobile productivity suite.

After Adobe stopped caring about the Macintosh platform, Apple focused on HTML5 and H.264 and backed away from Flash, a stance that singlehandedly terminated Flash on mobile devices (something that Adobe's much publicized Flash support for Android couldn't prevent) and marginalized its necessity on desktop systems as well.

Apple's initiatives haven't always been flawless slam-dunk successes, however. MobileMe Galleries, iWeb, Ping and iWork.com are just a few examples of its abandoned initiatives. The question is: is the new Maps a Safari or a Ping?

Strategically, of course, Apple needs iOS 6 Maps to succeed far more than its halfhearted stabs at free online services. The company's efforts to launch iWork, Safari and HTML5 were categorically ridiculed by critics at launch, too, making the campaigns to mock Maps nothing new.

Like iPhone 4's Antennagate and the criticism of Siri at the launch of iPhone 4S, competitors' complaints about iOS 6 Maps are likely to have little negative impact on demand for iPhone 5. What competitors should focus on is matching or exceeding Apple's efforts to global, modern vector maps, 3D visualizations and other new features to mobile users.
post #2 of 106

I'm sure Google can't believe their luck, that Apple would actually create a key weakness in the Apple platform.  Hopefully they work it out quickly, but I guarantee Google is in no rush to help Apple out of this bind by releasing a standalone app.

post #3 of 106
Daniel, this borders on a RoughlyDrafted Rant.... It provides interesting backstory and opinion, but not as much 'insider' information.

It's interesting, just not sure which Banner it should fly under.
post #4 of 106

Frankly, I really don't care how Google feels about this. 

 

They've been given the boot. It's all Apple's baby now. In the long term, Google isn't needed. 

post #5 of 106
It's been rumored for at least 3 years that Apple has been working on a maps. I knew it. Everybody knew it.

How, then, is It possible that Google was blindsided by this? I'm not buying it.
post #6 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

If Apple had given Google advanced notice of its intent to take Maps solo, Google could have devoted its efforts toward introducing its own Maps alternative that matched Apple's features and added more of its own right at the launch of iOS 6.

Right. And pigs can fly.

Google has made it clear for years that iOS users are second class citizens. Apple did what they had to do.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #7 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

I'm sure Google can't believe their luck, that Apple would actually create a key weakness in the Apple platform.  Hopefully they work it out quickly, but I guarantee Google is in no rush to help Apple out of this bind by releasing a standalone app.

Oh, yeah. I'm sure that's just what Google is thinking. /s

Key weakness? Outside of a few random whiners, most people seem relatively happy with Apple's Maps - and there's absolutely no sign that it has impacted sales. And Apple doesn't need Google to help them. By the time Google gets around to releasing an app, most of the more serious problems with Maps will have been fixed.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #8 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Right. And pigs can fly.
Google has made it clear for years that iOS users are second class citizens. Apple did what they had to do.

Amen. And good riddance.
post #9 of 106
Google treated iOS users like crap with their cripple Maps app. Like a GPS with old maps, it only hurts if the place you are going is affected. How many billions of locations are correct in Apple's iMaps?

I'm still saddened by the use of Tom Tom for data.
post #10 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

I'm sure Google can't believe their luck, that Apple would actually create a key weakness in the Apple platform.  Hopefully they work it out quickly, but I guarantee Google is in no rush to help Apple out of this bind by releasing a standalone app.

 

How do you reconcile your faith that Google is "in no rush to help Apple out" and the fact that Google is serving maps.google.com for free?

 

Google was formerly getting licensing revenues from Apple tied to map request volumes handled by iOS. How much do you think Apple pays Google to handle its own web requests? 

 

At this point, Google lost its iOS maps licensing income, as well traffic and queries from tens of millions of users, and is tasked with developing its own Google Maps for iOS that, out of necessity, must polish up its rough looking Android app and modernize Earth. 

 

Do you really think Google is going to hold up this effort out of some sort of imagined schadenfreude over "iLost," or do you think it is actually scrambling to get this finished?

 

Apple and Google aren't actors in a high school drama, they're companies out to earn money. Google just stopped making money on iOS maps, which represents the more valuable half of the world's mobile devices.

post #11 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

Google treated iOS users like crap with their cripple Maps app.

 

You mean google treated iOS users like crap because of apples inbuilt app that used googles data?  or the desire to charge for use of specific features?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #12 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 Google just stopped making money on iOS maps, which represents the more valuable half of the world's mobile devices.

 

Seeing googles contract with Apple has nother year running, what money have they stopped making?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #13 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

It's been rumored for at least 3 years that Apple has been working on a maps. I knew it. Everybody knew it.
How, then, is It possible that Google was blindsided by this? I'm not buying it.

 

How is it possible that Google was not blindsided and instead just hasn't gotten around to addressing its loss of half the world's mobile map-based revenue? 

 

Or is it your opinion that Google knew that iOS 6 would drop its native support for both YouTube and Google Maps, but that Google prioritized YouTube because it makes more money serving videos of garbage rather than providing maps and getting back real time traffic, location data and map queries? 

 

Because if you can buy that, I have a really crappy version of the Golden Gate Bridge to sell you. 

post #14 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post



Apple and Google aren't actors in a high school drama, they're companies out to earn money. Google just stopped making money on iOS maps, which represents the more valuable half of the world's mobile devices.

For this exact reason, Yahoo is my default search engine, and I use Siri whenever possible and as much as possible.
post #15 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Right. And pigs can fly.
Google has made it clear for years that iOS users are second class citizens. Apple did what they had to do.

 

Once again.  In what way.  the desire to charge for their features? or the apple created app that used google maps API's?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #16 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

Seeing googles contract with Apple has nother year running, what money have they stopped making?

 

If you look at Google's commercial contracts for Maps and Street View, they are based on the volume of requests being made. 

 

So when Apple's volume of iOS Map requests drops precipitously, what do you think happens to Google's revenue throughout the remainder of the year?

 

I assume you think Apple's Google Maps contract is like paying rent for an office even while it isn't using it. I think you should view it like Apple having a connection to the power grid but installing its own solar panels instead.

post #17 of 106

I don't want crappy Google maps back.....NOW I HAVE TURN BY TURN NAV......THANK YOU APPLE!!!!!!  All the Apple map issues will get sorted out...in the mean time Siri can fire up turn by turn Nav.  Google had the opportunity long ago to bring turn by turn to iOS and that twiddled their thumbs and we were stuck with a piece of crap Google Nav solution that had NO turn by turn and force you to manually cycle through waypoints.  This was a seriously degraded subpar solution when compared to the nice Google Nav solution provided to Android users.  Finally, I don't want a stand alone Nav solution from Google even if it has included turn by turn Nav.  I want a solution NATIVE to iOS that doesn't require an additional application to be carried on my iPhone as a band aid application.  Google....you snooze....you lose.  Buh bye.  You just lost 100 million customers and many like myself aren't coming back.  You blew it.

post #18 of 106

I still think Apple should have released Maps in iOS 6 as a beta.  Like SIRI was in iOS5.  Even when called Maps Beta still would be effective yet the word beta would quench criticism.

An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #19 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

If you look at Google's commercial contracts for Maps and Street View, they are based on the volume of requests being made. 

 

So when Apple's volume of iOS Map requests drops precipitously, what do you think happens to Google's revenue throughout the remainder of the year?

 

I assume you think Apple's Google Maps contract is like paying rent for an office even while it isn't using it. I think you should view it like Apple having a connection to the power grid but installing its own solar panels instead.

 

can you provide the commerical contracts between Google and Apple?


thnks

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #20 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

How is it possible that Google was not blindsided and instead just hasn't gotten around to addressing its loss of half the world's mobile map-based revenue? 

Or is it your opinion that Google knew that iOS 6 would drop its native support for both YouTube and Google Maps, but that Google prioritized YouTube because it makes more money serving videos of garbage rather than providing maps and getting back real time traffic, location data and map queries? 

Because if you can buy that, I have a really crappy version of the Golden Gate Bridge to sell you. 

Not even close.

I hope you can sell it for more than you bought it for.
post #21 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post


For this exact reason, Yahoo is my default search engine, and I use Siri whenever possible and as much as possible.

 

Well actually, while Apple pays Google to use its Maps data, Google pays Apple for referring search queries from Safari to it. 

 

Google has been paying Mozilla around $50 million per year to have Firefox send its millions of web search queries to Google (which is pretty much all the revenue Mozilla gets). 

 

The value of individual queries is pretty tiny, so you probably don't have to worry about using an inferior search engine just to spite Google. 

post #22 of 106

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

I'm trying to inform you. I don't think its necessary for you to be a dick in return just because you don't have an intelligent reply.  

 

You said "If you look at Google's commercial contracts for Maps and Street View"

 

 

I would like to, as you said, lookat the commercial contracts.  otherwise, you are stating something with no supporting evidence.  So perhaps you should quit being a dick, and support a claim?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #23 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post



The value of individual queries is pretty tiny, so you probably don't have to worry about using an inferior search engine just to spite Google. 

My needs are met... I'm not worried.
post #24 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Once again.  In what way.  the desire to charge for their features? or the apple created app that used google maps API's?

It's obvious that Google considered iOS users to be second class citizens. For example, lack of turn by turn directions for iOS users.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #25 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

Daniel, this borders on a RoughlyDrafted Rant.... It provides interesting backstory and opinion, but not as much 'insider' information.
It's interesting, just not sure which Banner it should fly under.

 

Ditto.  It's painful how quickly you can tell Dilger wrote the articles he's written here, and I don't mean that in a good way.  A little too fanboy-ish, often with spotty logic, and almost always with at least two healthy digressions that are barely worth skimming over.

 

The only interesting tidbit here is that losing iPhone users could put a kink in Google's ability to provide live traffic data, but even that's not described well.  It's like Change Bank; how are they really making cash?

 

I'd almost rather hear more about how Dilger's ripping off San Fran's city health care.

post #26 of 106
I think you'll find that all other commentators are actually saying that it is Apple that is waiting for Google and that Google has the upper hand here. Very poorly written and research ramble.
post #27 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

You said "If you look at Google's commercial contracts for Maps and Street View"

 

 

I would like to, as you said, lookat the commercial contracts.  otherwise, you are stating something with no supporting evidence.  So perhaps you should quit being a dick, and support a claim?

 

 

"Boom." - Steve Jobs

 

http://www.padgadget.com/2012/06/23/google-cuts-mapping-api-prices-after-being-dropped-by-apple-and-other-developers/

 

http://googlegeodevelopers.blogspot.com/2012/06/lower-pricing-and-simplified-limits.html

post #28 of 106
We are seeing essence of free market at work. Both groups are tremendously intelligent people. Google saw this coming and got going with Android. Apple understands the same truth with its IOS-Map. Both ecologies (Andriod IOS Map) are not perfect, but the race is ON. I like this.
post #29 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

Seeing googles contract with Apple has nother year running, what money have they stopped making?

 

 

Can you please provide the commerical contracts between Google and Apple so I can review the termination date as well as the terms for the licensing fee in order to verify that Apple is still required to pay Google despite the fact that they are not generating traffic on Google's servers.
 
Thanks!
post #30 of 106
Originally Posted by ernysp76 View Post
I think you'll find that all other commentators are actually saying that it is Apple that is waiting for Google and that Google has the upper hand here.

 

Okay, why? And why? 

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 #31 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post



Apple and Google aren't actors in a high school drama, they're companies out to earn money. Google just stopped making money on iOS maps, which represents the more valuable half of the world's mobile devices.

For this exact reason, Yahoo is my default search engine, and I use Siri whenever possible and as much as possible.

 

Yep!  It took years, but we, as a household,are "Microsoft-free".   We are working on becoming "Google-free".

 

You can choose, for the most part, to do business with/for those who you respect and trust...

"...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 #32 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

Once again.  In what way.  the desire to charge for their features? or the apple created app that used google maps API's?

Are you just guessing, or can you provide supporting documents that state exactly what Google demanded in order for Apple to be allowed to add the desired features (like turn-by-turn) to their iOS Maps App (Google version)?

post #33 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

You said "If you look at Google's commercial contracts for Maps and Street View"

 

 

I would like to, as you said, lookat the commercial contracts.  otherwise, you are stating something with no supporting evidence.  So perhaps you should quit being a dick, and support a claim?

 

Or you could google it yourself.

 

"Google Maps API for Business is extremely cost-effective, starting at just $10,000 per year. Pricing is based on the number of map page views for externally facing websites. For internal uses, it is based on page views or number of vehicles being tracked."

 

http://www.google.com/enterprise/earthmaps/maps-faq.html

 

It's not exactly a controversial idea that Google would charge companies based on the volume of transactions they make. 

post #34 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

You mean google treated iOS users like crap because of apples inbuilt app that used googles data?  or the desire to charge for use of specific features?

You mean google treated apple users like crap because it told apple that turn by turn and mass transit and pedestrian traffic and traffic reroutes were android only and meant to differentiate the android app from the apple app therefore placing all apple users at the short end of the stick?  I thought so.  Google has always made it no secret why apple users got a crappy version of there data no matter who made the app they did it so they could say android had an advantage over iOS.  I really like apples maps and it will only get better over time.  Good riddance  to Google.  The carpet bagger company of all time.

post #35 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

can you provide the commerical contracts between Google and Apple?


thnks

 

I'm trying to inform you. I don't think its necessary for you to be a dick in return just because you don't have an intelligent reply.  

 

 

I just reported the above post:

 

Quote:

 

I really resent DED posting responses to his own articles under a pseudonym.
 
Then, he insults posters who do not agree with his pronouncements.
 
This is the very reason I no-longer follow his blog at Roughly Drafted.
 
AI readers deserve better than to be insulted by the author of an article just because they do not agree with him!

 

 

"...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 #36 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


It's obvious that Google considered iOS users to be second class citizens. For example, lack of turn by turn directions for iOS users.

 

A feature google wanted reimbursed for.  That not treating htem as second class citizens.  Thats apple not wanting to pay google for that feature.

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #37 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

Or you could google it yourself.

 

"Google Maps API for Business is extremely cost-effective, starting at just $10,000 per year. Pricing is based on the number of map page views for externally facing websites. For internal uses, it is based on page views or number of vehicles being tracked."

 

http://www.google.com/enterprise/earthmaps/maps-faq.html

 

It's not exactly a controversial idea that Google would charge companies based on the volume of transactions they make. 

 

A generic faq is not Googles contract with Apple

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #38 of 106
Too bad the only place that Apple can beat Google Maps is China.
post #39 of 106

"It (Apple) wanted to show off an amazing Maps experience that raised the bar and would leave Google scrambling to port a good enough version of its own maps to compete with it."

 

Now that is the funniest BS line I have ever read.  Unfortunately, that did not happen.  They ended up with a Map app that is lacking in features.  The majority of satellite data in Apple's map is low resolution, compared to Google which has had high resolution satellite images for years.  There are even better turn-by-turn nav apps for the iPhone that are far superior to Apple's pathetic attempt.  Waze Social GPS is free, and it uses real time traffic info by the 20 million users of the app.  Apple can't do that.  If people were begging for turn-by-turn nav, it has been available for years.  You didn't have to wait for Apple to do it, and then botch it up.  TomTom?  Really Apple?  That is the lowest rated GPS system on the market.  Maybe they got it for cheap.  No street view?  How does that raise the bar?  If anyone does a lot of field work for their job, street view is far more useful than Flyover.  No one cares about the top of a building.  Most people have GPS in their car, or a portable GPS in their car, that is far better than a phone.  Apple's map is an embarrassment.  Google won't lose any sleep over this because the complaints about the lack of features are valid.

post #40 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Originally Posted by ernysp76 View Post
I think you'll find that all other commentators are actually saying that it is Apple that is waiting for Google and that Google has the upper hand here.

 

Okay, why? And why? 

 

I think, that the acceleration of iOS 6 maps availability, and simultaneous discontinuance of iOS 5 maps has put Google at a disadvantage:

  1. they no-longer get income from maps on iOS 6
  2. they no-longer can harvest data from iOS 6 map requests to be used for ads, tracking and maintenance of the Google Maps database
  3. they lost a position of strength in negotiating power with Apple

 

So... rather than going to Google, with hat in hand, to negotiate for advanced map features for iOS that are already available in Android (Apple's major iOS competitor) -- Apple no longer has any need to negotiate with Google over maps... at all!

 

Further, Apple has the choice to: 1) disallow any follow on apps (Earth, Maps, etc.) as duplicating integrated system function... or  2) allow them as, by definition not integrated, they will be inferior, late, out-of-date, difficult-to-use -- and, likely, founder of their own accord!

 

 

Brilliant move Tim!  This was, definitely the right decision!

 

The implementation (of the decision) has some issues -- but they will be much easier to resolve than to continue dancing with an 800-lb [map] gorilla.

 

 

Stated simply:  "Google... Piss Off!"

"...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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › How Google was "skyhooked" by Apple's new iOS 6 Maps