or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's "iLost" Motorola ad faked an address to "lose" iOS 6 Maps
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's "iLost" Motorola ad faked an address to "lose" iOS 6 Maps - Page 6

post #201 of 268
Nice. I be sure not to give my $$$ to MotoGoogle ever. They are just evil

Cheers !
Cheers !
Reply
Cheers !
Reply
post #202 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


It's called an example that I pulled from Google images to illustrate that Google Maps isn't always going to be perfect. Here is another.

 

 

That screenshot looks very old.

post #203 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

Yes, absolutely.

 

They had no choice but to do it manually, because they don't have the ability to, "[leverage] the power of the computer that stores the database." They don't have access directly to Apple's servers, so, yes, absolutely, they paid people to do it.

 

They didn't do it just for the ad, they did it for this entire astroturfing, media shepherding, PR campaign they have launched against Apple's Maps. But, it's clear they had to dig pretty deep for some pretty arcane results. Getting shut out from iPhone users will put a big hit on their revenues, they have no scruples, so, yes, absolutely.

Google doesn't need direct access to Apple's servers to use computers to search for discrepancies.  Knowing what area they would want to use in an ad, they would have a program make queries to Apple's servers using addresses from that region and compare the coordinates of the results to those in their own database.  All discrepancies would be added to a list; any discrepancy on that list would be equally usable because the programmers would already have defined a region (in this case NYC or possibly an even more specific region) where the results could be located.  Using one of these incorrectly listed points, they would create an ad showing the on-screen results of searching for the known problem address.

 

It's really quite simple.

 

And with regards to your idea that Google is creating all the news about Apple's maps, your unbelievably delusional.  This website is the only thing creating news stories out of nothing.


Edited by wakefinance - 9/28/12 at 1:06am
post #204 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandman619 View Post

Nice. I be sure not to give my $$$ to MotoGoogle ever. They are just evil
Cheers !
You may even hurt them more; i just read ios6 isn't sending google http headers anymore. So goodbye to google ads LOL
post #205 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


It's called an example that I pulled from Google images to illustrate that Google Maps isn't always going to be perfect. Here is another.

Do you want to argue this is just a "walking route" to help you get more exercise and see the sights?
Bottom line: Apple's maps are flawed but for you et al. to make sweeping implications that Google Maps is flawless isn't only BS but also a bit insane as there are real arguments you could make against Apple Maps if you actually put in the effort to form a cogent argument.
Note that I have said since the first iOS 6 beta they are shipping Apple Maps too soon, although having to re-negotiate a deal with Google month before iOS 7 or having to replace the Maps app mi iOS 6 cycle are neither good solutions so this is the best of bad options they had to chose from, which solidifies the need even more than ever that Apple needs to control their Maps app.

 

First of all, where in my posts do I implicate that Google Maps is flawless - please point to the appropriate text passage or quit projecting your fantasies on me. I merely pointed out that this cropped screen-shot of your example doesn't hold up in an argument.

I appreciate the name calling though, hopefully the mods will too.

 

Second - and I'm repeating myself here - the ferries shave off 6 hours of your trip and there is an option to exclude them from your "walking trip" which makes it a grand total of 33 hours instead of 27.

 

Third, thank you for providing another angle of your dishonesty by showing an outdated screen-shot of Google Maps, when the current directions looks like this:

 

I'll give you a tip: The "but back then theirs was bad too"-argument doesn't hold up well in any industry.

 

Fact is that currently iOS maps isn't on the same level as Google Maps and Apple has catching up to do.

Doubting the capability of a company to do so and criticizing the political motive behind it is well within everyone's right as long as there is evidence of severe faults in the maps application itself (see user reports). The future will show how fast Apple can improve it, but for the moment I'd hazard a guess that the average iPhone user would prefer to have both solutions run in parallel for at least a year and I don't believe the majority applauds Apple for cutting off Google in the same way some of the die-hard fans (those that ponder about the political motives behind the move) on internet boards do.

 

You would've been more credible if you posted pictures of a distorted bridge/dam, on which both mapping solutions seem to have problems with (wonder about Nokia's maps there).


Edited by Ateny - 9/28/12 at 3:25am
post #206 of 268

here is a shot from google maps. geyer and riverside marked wrong. been reported many times since 2007, never fixed. 

Dont need to fake an address with google, just look for the right address or road and it gets it wrong. Also it puts my old house about 1000 feet down the road from its actual location.

Lame

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply
post #207 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogueDogRandy View Post

here is a shot from google maps. geyer and riverside marked wrong. been reported many times since 2007, never fixed. 

Dont need to fake an address with google, just look for the right address or road and it gets it wrong. Also it puts my old house about 1000 feet down the road from its actual location.

Lame


Is Bing Maps right on this?

 

Tried with Google Maps and got Geyer and Riverside mixed in both the top street and the one of the right.

post #208 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

...And with regards to your idea that Google is creating all the news about Apple's maps, your unbelievably delusional.  This website is the only thing creating news stories out of nothing.

 

 

Tell me that this wasn't created just to make as much mileage about the Apple Maps beatup. Whomever runs this account has been attacking anyone who tweets with tags that alert this account to a dissenting view. Didn't like me writing that Goog Maps has had my property elsewhere to its actual location for years. 'You're unbelievably delusional' is the expression you were after.


Edited by IQatEdo - 9/28/12 at 4:39am
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #209 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

Google doesn't need direct access to Apple's servers to use computers to search for discrepancies.  Knowing what area they would want to use in an ad, they would have a program make queries to Apple's servers using addresses from that region and compare the coordinates of the results to those in their own database.  All discrepancies would be added to a list; any discrepancy on that list would be equally usable because the programmers would already have defined a region (in this case NYC or possibly an even more specific region) where the results could be located.  Using one of these incorrectly listed points, they would create an ad showing the on-screen results of searching for the known problem address.

 

It's really quite simple.

 

And with regards to your idea that Google is creating all the news about Apple's maps, your unbelievably delusional.  This website is the only thing creating news stories out of nothing.

 

You're making the rash assumption that just any old bot can query Apple's map servers. That may not be the case. Also, searching for what isn't there is not as easy as you seem to think. But, either way, they had obviously been sifting through Apple's map data for some time prior to the release of i

 

As for your point that I'm delusional, you're either incredibly naive or totally out of touch. Companies, particularly Google, feed the media stories all the time. It's also pretty well known that they pay people to post on sites like this, pretending to be ordinary "citizens", and pushing the company "story". Sometimes what looks like a coordinated media/astroturfing blitz, timed to hit the street the day after iOS 6 was released and the day before the iPhone 5 was, is in fact just that and not a coincidence. Is "all" the noise from Google? No. But did they kick off and stimulate this particular controversy? I think it has their fingerprints all over it.

 

It's not like Google has shown themselves to be some sort of paragon of virtue. On the contrary, they've shown themselves to be a dishonest, in fact criminal, organization that has no respect for the any norms of ethical behavior. As a company (and perhaps this stems from the persons at the top) Google has demonstrated time and again that they are a psychopathic organization. They have no sense of right or wrong. They have no conscience. Absolutely nothing restrains their behavior, a psychopath will do anything they think will benefit them.


Edited by anonymouse - 9/28/12 at 4:41am
post #210 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


It depends a bit on what you regard as an irrelevant address. Search algorithms are generally programmed to be helpful for malformed or incomplete queries, and so returning the nearest likely address is not necessarily a bad result.
However, that doesn't appear to have been the issue here; originally iOS maps seemed to return the "correct" address when "Manhattan" was included in the query, but not if it was omitted. Now it works either way. That rather kills the argument that iOS maps correctly identified the nearest instance of that address, since it clearly does recognize it as a valid address.

 

Apparently you either didn't read or understand the article this thread is attached to. You seemed to have missed the part where Apple Maps returned the nearest instance where it was a real address. Only if Manhattan were included in the query, thus excluding, "the nearest instance where it was a real address," did it return an interpolated address in Manhattan that doesn't exist.

 

That rather kills your whole perspective on the issue. The fact that they've tweaked the algorithm in response to this nonsense is neither here nor there. The argument that the way Google Maps was returning results is the correct one is begging the question. Both approaches have their merits and downsides. Just because Apple was originally handling a query for a fake address differently than Google doesn't make them wrong -- unless we assume that however Google does it is always right -- it just makes it different.

 

What does make someone wrong here is Google putting out this ad when they had to have known the circumstances surrounding the address in question, and of course knew they were being entirely deceptive. In fact, that rather kills the argument that this entire "controversy" isn't a story being pushed by Google

post #211 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

It depends a bit on what you regard as an irrelevant address. Search algorithms are generally programmed to be helpful for malformed or incomplete queries, and so returning the nearest likely address is not necessarily a bad result.

However, that doesn't appear to have been the issue here; originally iOS maps seemed to return the "correct" address when "Manhattan" was included in the query, but not if it was omitted. Now it works either way. That rather kills the argument that iOS maps correctly identified the nearest instance of that address, since it clearly does recognize it as a valid address.

Apparently you either didn't read or understand the article this thread is attached to. You seemed to have missed the part where Apple Maps returned the nearest instance where it was a real address. Only if Manhattan were included in the query, thus excluding, "the nearest instance where it was a real address," did it return an interpolated address in Manhattan that doesn't exist.

That rather kills your whole perspective on the issue. The fact that they've tweaked the algorithm in response to this nonsense is neither here nor there. The argument that the way Google Maps was returning results is the correct one is begging the question. Both approaches have their merits and downsides. Just because Apple was originally handling a query for a fake address differently than Google doesn't make them wrong -- unless we assume that however Google does it is always right -- it just makes it different.

What does make someone wrong here is Google putting out this ad when they had to have known the circumstances surrounding the address in question, and of course knew they were being entirely deceptive. In fact, that rather kills the argument that this entire "controversy" isn't a story being pushed by Google

I don't think you read the context of my reply. Note that my very first point is in defense of returning the nearest actual matching address.

I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.

That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.

Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.
post #212 of 268

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 1/21/13 at 3:06pm
post #213 of 268

Regardless of who said what and when......

 

The facts are 

 

Google Maps right now is head and shoulders above iOS6 Maps. You can argue the merits of each image till the cows come home it does not change a thing.

 

So until iOS maps prove themselves and fix those aweful graphics they will remain the butt of all map related jokes. Having said that I have notice times when iOS maps does look better than GMaps but that is only in the US.... on a global scale they are light years ahead,

post #214 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.

 

Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.

 

However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.

 

The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.

 

Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.

post #215 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by petrosy View Post

Regardless of who said what and when......

The facts are 

Google Maps right now is head and shoulders above iOS6 Maps. You can argue the merits of each image till the cows come home it does not change a thing.

No, the facts are that a lot of whiners are SAYING that Google Maps is head and shoulders above Apple's Maps, but no one has yet provided any scientific evidence to support that allegation.

As soon as you have evidence showing a statistical difference between the two, feel free to present it.
"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 #216 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.

 

Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.

 

However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.

 

The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.

 

Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.

 

I have no idea what you are reading from my post to conclude that it is ridiculous, but if you really are reading that I believe that there is no thought behind Apple's maps then you are reading it incorrectly. I don't know what you mean by "running queries unintelligently against a data set", and I never made that assertion. All these systems run queries against sets of data, with varyingly sophisticated algorithms to parse and modify the output. The only comment I made about that was in support of the idea of returning the nearest real address.

 

It should be fairly simple to determine if iOS maps typically do or do not return non-existent addresses, which would give more insight into whether they have a policy on that or whether it is determined just by the completeness of the data that they use, which may well vary geographically.

 

With the caveats that there are obviously some data issues to be resolved and that I now use one of the third party apps to access street view when I need it, I prefer Apple's implementation and I support their decision to move away from dependence on Google for mapping.

post #217 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

 

With two posts.  And you joined last week.  Uh, yeah, not buying it.

Fanatics are funny (on both OS)

 

In this case, even Apple pretty much admitted that the map application sucks. And you people cant?

 

See for your self....

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57522196-37/apple-ceo-we-are-extremely-sorry-for-maps-flap/?tag=nl.e498&s_cid=e498

 

Both OS are great, both have stuff that sucks. No way around it just facts.

 

Google takes risks when developing new tech (true innovation). Apple does not, they play it safe, but they do like to make existing stuff look and feel awesome (e.g. turn by turn Navigation, 4G, and maybe next year NFC).  People on both side need to stop the hate & the fan crap and be objective.  At the end of the day it is all about what works better for you; and for the companies it should be about how to improve and/or invent technology that will make life easier and more convenient for the world. 

post #218 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


No, the facts are that a lot of whiners ...

Simply curious why you think Tim Cook felt he needed to apologize to Apple owners using Apple's new maps? It's not a trap question either, I'm truly interested in your personal view on why it was done. To me it seems very un-Apple-like to release a PR statement referring to a non-existent problem, and even more so to apologize for it.


Edited by Gatorguy - 9/28/12 at 7:35am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #219 of 268
Originally Posted by RichL View Post
That screenshot looks very old.

 

What's that? Things can improve over time? Say it isn't so.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #220 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Simply curious why you think Tim Cook felt he needed to apologize to Apple owners using Apple's new maps? It's not a trap question either, I'm truly interested in your personal view on why it was done. To me it seems very un-Apple-like to release a PR statement referring to a non-existent problem, and even more so to apologize for it.

Cook had four options:

1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.

2. Backtrack and drop Apple Maps and get a new agreement with Google. This does the same thing - as well as gives Google even more leverage over the platform.

3. Do what Jobs did with the antennagate issue and come out with facts and evidence that every phone has the same issue and yours is actually better than most. This also inflames the haters. In addition, I doubt if anyone has sufficient evidence to make a statistically valid sample comparing the accuracy of the different maps, so it's probably not possible.

4. Tell the audience that "we're aware we're not perfect and we can do better. Here's what we're doing to address your concerns".

From a PR perspective, that takes the wind out of the sails of the Apple haters and allows Apple to continue to do what they are already working on (there are already plenty of reports of errors that have been fixed). So, regardless of what the actual facts are, the letter he sent is probably the best thing he could do to make the issue go away.
"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 #221 of 268
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.

 

I don't get why that would be the case. Apple did this dozens of times with Steve at the helm, and this never happened. 

Steve only wrote letters when he wanted to push the human race forward. When something Apple would never do was happening or when something that didn't directly affect users was happening.

 

Tim doing the same would have resulted in a letter while Google was still the mapping service. In it, he would have made public the reason Apple made their own maps (Google refusing to provide turn by turn, as an example of something we still don't know), as well as their plan for the future thereof. 

 

Doing THAT preemptively would have removed most of the legitimate complaints with the service at launch and all of the illegitimate ones. I wish he would have done that.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #222 of 268
Come on people you're smarter than this. Ever think they just used a fake address in a similar way advertisers use fake 555 phone numbers. Everyone knows the problem exists they just made up a 555 address big deal.
post #223 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

Losing Google's YouTube App on iOS:
No biggie...we don't have to watch Gangnam Style

Losing Google Maps on iOS:
Millions of users in the Apple community disoriented...Apple, this is a monumental and fundamental part of what makes the iPhone or any smartphone a fledging Internet communications device. We have become so dependant on this in our daily lives and we take google maps as a feature that we pay for on iPhone having paid 1000's of dollars on products.

When the first iPhone came out, google maps was a primary feature and since then it always has been for millions of us. Now... Suddenly this smartphone is not so smart after all is it?

All we as customers want is some official statement regarding the situation so we can make calculated decisions in our own lives. The majority of users don't care about your beef with Google... We just want to know what's going to be done about this fiasco of epic proportions.


Really?  REALLY???  "epic proportions"?  Wow dude...you're life must be otherwise quite meaningless!

post #224 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
Come on people you're smarter than this. Ever think they just used a fake address in a similar way advertisers use fake 555 phone numbers. Everyone knows the problem exists they just made up a 555 address big deal.

 

I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #225 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

This just confirms the impression that most of the noise over maps on iOS 6 is coming from a Google orchestrated PR campaign that includes false and misleading ads like this one, significant shepherding of media and bloggers to "get Google's story out", and a wide-scale astroturfing campaign.

 

The question the media and blogosphere out to be asking is, "Is there any deception that Google will not stoop to?"

couldn't have said it better myself.  Apple should sue over misleading customers.  what if apple were to publish and ad stating that searching on google gives your pc a virus???

post #226 of 268

"I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made."

 

Okay lets go with that line of reasoning. What's more stupid using a fake address or not being able to find a real address. Or what's more stupid using one fake address in an advertisement and everyone obviously knows it's a fake address or having to spend hours putting the pins in the correct location and reporting location problems for every business in your town. The problem exists just because they used a fake address in an advertisement doesn't magically make IOS6 maps feel less stupid. Sure it may be stupid but it's just an advertisement it's not a product that someone spent money on that doesn't live up to it's goal.


Edited by gdingfrii - 9/28/12 at 9:14am
post #227 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post

Or what's more stupid using one fake address in an advertisement and everyone obviously knows it's a fake address…

 

Stop right there. Start over. Retract any assumptions about "everyone knowing" something.

 

Also retract any assumptions that Google Maps is infallible, and then start over.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #228 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Stop right there. Start over. Retract any assumptions about "everyone knowing" something.

 

Also retract any assumptions that Google Maps is infallible, and then start over.

 

I never said google maps was infallible. Every man made device, application, etc. is fallible. And yes everyone that would be interested in this article knows that maps is a problem. When the CEO of Apple releases a statement suggesting that it's customers use a different map application or mapping website until they bring their application up to standards then I feel okay saying that everyone knows it's a problem.

post #229 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
And yes everyone that would be interested in this article knows that maps is a problem.

 

Then why are they advertising to everyone? 

 

You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #230 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Then why are they advertising to everyone? 

 

You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.

 

How did I not respond to your original position: "...as stupid a move as can be made." An application that is paid for that isn't up to standard is as stupid a move as can be made.

post #231 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Then why are they advertising to everyone? 

 

You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.

I've never seen mention on where that ad was placed other than to Moto's own page on Google+. Did Motorola publish it elsewhere or pay to have it advertised on other webpages or magazines? Just curious if anyone has seen it as an ad anywhere at all in the wild?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #232 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
How did I not respond to your original position: "...as stupid a move as can be made." 

 

What do you mean "how"? Making up an address and then touting how your company can find it and others cannot is not valid advertising.


An application that is paid for that isn't up to standard is as stupid a move as can be made.

 

Why is it always the Anti-Apple Brigade that seems to be scammed into paying for iOS updates? Because no real person had to pay for iOS 6.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #233 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

What do you mean "how"? Making up an address and then touting how your company can find it and others cannot is not valid advertising.

 

Why is it always the Anti-Apple Brigade that seems to be scammed into paying for iOS updates? Because no real person had to pay for iOS 6.

So you're saying someone that bought an iPhone 5 has the option to update to iOS 6? And I am not Anti-Apple.

post #234 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
So you're saying someone that bought an iPhone 5 has the option to update to iOS 6?

 

You certainly have the option of not buying an iPhone with iOS 6, not using Apple Maps on said iPhone…

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #235 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

You certainly have the option of not buying an iPhone with iOS 6, not using Apple Maps on said iPhone…

That's true if you didn't buy it the day it came out and if you can't use Apple Maps then someone should call Apple out for it until it's fixed. Fake address or not the problem exists and it's Apple's fault that the ad is even somewhat credible cause motorola doesn't even make that post if the problem doesn't exist.

post #236 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
That's true if you didn't buy it the day it came out and if you can't use Apple Maps then someone should call Apple out for it until it's fixed.


So we should also be calling out Google. Loudly. Vocally. In the media. Daily. Screaming 24/7. 


Fake address or not…

 

Please don't pretend that argument is done. 


…it's Apple's fault that the ad is even somewhat credible…

 

Apple can make an equally credible ad by simply inventing a location of their own and pointing their maps to it, claiming that no other mapping service is worth its weight in paper because it cannot find something that does not exist. 

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #237 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


So we should also be calling out Google. Loudly. Vocally. In the media. Daily. Screaming 24/7. 

 

Please don't pretend that argument is done. 

 

Apple can make an equally credible ad by simply inventing a location of their own and pointing their maps to it, claiming that no other mapping service is worth its weight in paper because it cannot find something that does not exist. 

Yes you should if you purchased a Google product and it did not meet your standards you should call them out.

 

Apple could make an ad like that and it would be credible for that one location but unlike Apple maps for other mapping services the problem is not wide spread which is the issue Motorola is jumping on.

post #238 of 268
Originally Posted by gdingfrii View Post
Yes you should if you purchased a Google product and it did not meet your standards you should call them out.

 

Ha ha! Good one! Almost had us there. Google stuff is free for the product to use. So we can't complain if we didn't pay for it, huh?


…unlike Apple maps for other mapping services the problem is not wide spread…

 

Oh, you wanna bet? Really?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #239 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Ha ha! Good one! Almost had us there. Google stuff is free for the product to use. So we can't complain if we didn't pay for it, huh?

 

Oh, you wanna bet? Really?

Yeah cause that's why I posted. Was to get you.

 

Well I haven't used another map service yet that had every business in a town wrong but if you want to prove me wrong feel free. 

post #240 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

 

 

Tell me that this wasn't created just to make as much mileage about the Apple Maps beatup. Whomever runs this account has been attacking anyone who tweets with tags that alert this account to a dissenting view. Didn't like me writing that Goog Maps has had my property elsewhere to its actual location for years. 'You're unbelievably delusional' is the expression you were after.

Please excuse my mistake.  I think it's abundantly clear that I have a good grasp of English grammar, but I appreciate your correction.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's "iLost" Motorola ad faked an address to "lose" iOS 6 Maps