Inaccurate Apple Maps directions causes 'life threatening issue' for travelers, says Australian... - Page 10

That's red herring. Also, I don't have a magical logic, but you were beating a dead horse.


It's amazing how logically sound people such as you seem completely incapable of proving me wrong...

Those "magic logic powers" are basically (1) claiming everyone else is irrational, (2) claiming everyone has already been 'refuted' by magic logic, and (3) using a double standard and justifying it with another double standard.

 

The article says several other things as well, for example,

 

 

You may feel that any result is better than no result, however, I'll take accuracy over nonsense any day. Now who's having trouble with reading comprehension? Or did you ignore that because it didn't support your argument?

Apple Maps is worse as a replacement -- that's my claim, and that's already been proven. What matters in a replacement is that the replacement part match all the properties of the replaced part. Whether the replacement part has more properties is irrelevant because those properties are not replacing anything and thus are not expected, but if it has less properties, then it's worse than the original part. The reason for this, as I have explained a number of times throughout the thread, is because when you replace something, the replacement is expected to do everything that the original part did. People complain because their expectations were not met when they were promised better, not just different. You may choose to not understand this if you like, but denying reality won't get you anywhere, so you may as well accept human nature as it is.

What's that got to do with your claim that you had already refuted any future arguments I might make?

 

Yes, I've encountered his magic logic powers before, when he claimed that reductio ad absurdum is a fallacy, well, sometimes, because it's used in a straw man argument, except when it isn't... 

Really? Where was that proven? In the same post where you claimed to have magically refuted any future arguments I might make?

Once again, I'll repeat it:
So, where is the proof that the total number of errors in Apple Maps is greater than the total number of errors in Google Maps? (Hint: the article you cited doesn't make that claim - they state that the number of errors is the same, but Apple fails in a different way. Furthermore, one province in Canada is not the rest of the world. You are making a claim that Apple Maps is worse. Period. So you must have global data on the numbers for #1 and #2 above.).

Still waiting for that proof.

At the risk of continuing the pissing contest...

 

But, with the potential of ending it...

 

 

 

Here's a famous landmark of a once-powerful government and its infamous leader:

 

 

 

 

 

Now, with Google Maps...

 

 

Note:  Because it is in the middle of the river -- I suppose Street View is NA!

Yep, this is mother nature at work - evolutionary pressure is still high...

 

 

First time someone is describing Frederick William II. of Prussia as infamous 

Edited by smalM - 12/10/12 at 2:01pm

 

That brings up an interesting point: do they have Street View in Venice?

 

*crickets*

You acknowledge that in that case it is down to a question of subjectivity (which I disagree, but that doesn't matter); you also claim that that article provides an objective comparison between both engines; and it just happens that subjective objectivism is an oxymoron. thus refuting your claim about the article's objectivity. So back to stage one with you! Provide a definition for "objective"!

When I mentioned that it lacks a feature similar to Google Street View.


Why would that be required to validate my argument? Simply demonstrating that Apple Maps lacks services that Google Maps provides is enough to make it an unsuitable replacement. If a feature goes missing, that's a downgrade.

 

That was my subjective comparison, not the article's, Mr. Magic Logic Powers.

 

 And I don't even use these things normally, but he's too funny.

Do you recall me asking for your definition of objectivism? You claim that the article is objective, yet you agree that certain points are debatable, which defeats the point of using that article as your definition of objectivism. I'm even allowing you to play your game that way because debating in uncomfortable situations appeals me; otherwise I would have told you immediately that you never posted your definition of objectivism for scrutiny.

 

Your arugment revolves around the lack of evidence. Just because you see there is no proof that Apple Maps has more errors than Google Maps doesn't mean that Apple Maps doesn't have more errors than Google Maps. The problem with your request is that the proof is something that can't be readily provided (especially by people like us; hell, I'm not even sure if anyone can provide the proof you want) and then you claim that since we can't provide the evidence, then your point is correct by default. It's almost like the debate whether or not God exists.

 

Because of this constraint, the only thing we can do is go off of evidence that has been posted by various sources that do compare the two at various points around the globe. And then look up more and more of them. And from those sites combined, in general, Apple Maps makes more mistakes than Google Maps. The full amount of errors will never be known.

 

Objectivism is a philosophy propounded by Ayn Rand.

 

And, no, there aren't really any debatable points.

 

Actually, there is one street view-- on the bridge entering the city...

 

St. Marks Square has a pigeon-pucky view though...

Edited by Dick Applebaum - 12/10/12 at 2:35pm

OK, then not only can you not clearly position the goal posts, but you are also denying things that you accepted earlier, which are out there in the thread for anyone who wishes to read, so I don't need you to recognize it.

Now just to finish this up: providing a comparison is not required for my argument, because I was arguing against the notion that the double standard was irrational and my reasoning has both been explained and proven without needing a comparison of map data. If, however, you think you can refute my point about the double standard being rational by demonstrating a need to compare map data, please explain why that need exists in a way that has not already been refuted.

 

I was referring to Der Alte!

 

I think we all missed the part where you actually refuted anything. However, in the spirit of your logic...

 

I hereby declare Vaelian soundly defeated on all points. All his arguments, made or not made, have been refuted in perpetuity. Q.E.D.

Regardless of what you think someone should do (ie. check the satellite) This is Australia, land of great open spaces. The lack of streets and buildings, is something that is commonplace in Australia.

Let's assume this guy lives in the city, his Apple Maps might work reasonably well in the city. He'd have no reason to believe they wouldn't work just as well in the country. 

Obviously now this guy will be checking various sources, as will I. It often takes something like this to cause people to realise how important it is for customers to check. 

 

Parents in law were talking about their iPad. Love the screen, love the photos, love the portability. But having no end of troubles with Apple IDs, iCloud, internet settings (wi fi, mobile data, etc).

 

At one stage, father in law came out with "It just doesn't work" - he wasn't being ironic, he doesn't know the old tag lines from Jobs.

 

Apple know how to do the fruit, but they still struggle with the orchid.

No, you're missing the entire point. Apple has billions of dollars! We have pay a premium for Apple Products. So the maps should work. That's what billions of dollars does, gives you an opportunity to be the best.

Use Google jragosta, there are many side-by-side comparisons and reviews of Apple Maps. All users say the same thing, they generally seem to work well in America, but are average in the rest of the world. Although regardless of any review, this guy got lost using Apple Maps. Apple maps have made a serious error in this instance. Apple need to fix their maps. 

This guy who got lost might have lived in a city (where Apple Maps actually work okay), which is why he didn't think to check. Most people only check a different mapping service, when their maps don't work properly. So I'm sure he'll be checking more than one service from now on.

 

And Australia is full of wide-open-spaces. We often drive for hours surrounded by bushland. They wouldn't have had any idea they were going the wrong way until they were close to arriving at their destination. 





 

 

Ah, the classic 'Argument from ignorance'. After all, if something can't be proven false, it must be true! Just set the bar high enough for proving it false, and you will never be wrong :)

Perhaps Apple should fix their maps? Perhaps they had used iOS5 to get there many times without a problem, and didn't realise that iOS6 maps was wrong.

I'm certainly not saying other mapping services are perfect, but I'm certainly saying Apple Maps are ridden with problems in Australia. Apple Maps is a paid mapping service. It is NOT good enough. 

 

Money ≠ Right.

 

I'm going to come at your argument using your argument, so hopefully it'll finally sink in.

 

I'm going to make two assumptions from your point of view that I believe we both can at least agree on about the state of Apple Maps compared to Google Maps:

1. Apple Maps is worse than Google Maps

2. Apple Maps is just as good as Google Maps

3. Apple Maps is better than Google Maps

 

Yes? The comparison between the two has to exist in one of those states at any given point.

 

Now, considering who I'm addressing, I will make my second assumption: that you believe Apple Maps is as good or better than Google Maps. If you assert that Apple Maps is not worse than Google Maps, then those two are the only options to pick from. So using your own burden of proof, I ask you to provide the global data that shows that Apple Maps has just as many or less mistakes than Google Maps.

 

I'm willing to bet that you don't have access to that data either, so you can't even meet your own burden of proof. So what does that show us? That the burden of proof bar was set so high that no one can achieve it. If you want to have a discussion, you can't set the level of proof that high. Thus leaving us with only showing sites where comparisons are made. Hell, just going on a feature-by-feature basis (something that can be definitively shown), Google Maps beats out Apple Maps.

 

 

Another way to look at your arugment is you asking me to show proof of black holes. I bring you X-ray images, IR images, and gravitational distortion charts as proof black holes exist. But you reject all that evidence and want a visible light spectrum picture of a black hole or you won't believe black holes exist. Seeing as visible light spectrum pictures do not exist (to my knowledge), no one can meet your level of proof.

Oh, so we're going to drop the accuracy argument that you've been soundly losing and move to a features argument? Well, aside from the fact that the discussion had nothing to do with features, let's play your game.

Apple Maps - Fly By and turn by turn directions.
Google Maps on iOS - Street view and LACKS turn by turn directions.

Now, it's well known that being distracted from your driving by looking at electronic devices causes accidents and deaths. So, Apple's turn by turn directions could potentially be saving lives. So are you going to argue that Street view (compared to fly by) will save more lives than lack of turn by turn directions causes?

That might be a reasonable argument - IF i were claiming that Apple Maps was superior to Google Maps. Instead, I've simply stated that there's no real evidence that it's worse.

You and Vaelian and all the other shills running around screaming about how Apple's Maps is useless and broken and inferior to Google Maps are the ones making a claim - so it's up to you to prove it. Until then, I am simply pointing out the logical flaw in your claims - that you're making an unfounded claim with no evidence. I don't need evidence to point out the flaw in your argument.

Personally, I don't believe that Apple Maps is significantly better (and I never claimed that it was). I suspect that in some places it is (China, for example) and some places it's probably worse, but overall, from a global perspective, I don't have any reason to believe that either one is better than the other by any significant amount. In the US, they're probably both right 99.9% of the time. In Australia, the numbers may be much lower, but no one has shown any reason to believe that there is a difference.

For about the 8th or 10th time:
1. There are x number of places where Apple Maps gives the wrong result.
2. There are y number of places where Google Maps gives the wrong result.

Your claim that Apple's Maps doesn't work is true only if x > y. So where's the evidence that it is?

Apple does need to fix their maps - and they're doing it all the time. Google needs to fix their maps, too - and they're doing it all the time.

Simply pointing out some cases where Apple Maps fails is irrelevant. There are also cases where Apple gives the right result and Google doesn't (at least one was given in this thread). Unless you can show that x > y, your claim is unsubstantiated.

That's called a straw man argument. You're making up arguments and pretending I said them. No where have I claimed that Apple Maps is better than Google Maps. In fact, I've never even claimed that it's as good as Google Maps (although I stated earlier that my personal belief is that they're probably pretty similar, I don't have any evidence so wouldn't make that claim).

I am simply pointing out that you and all the others whining that Apple Maps is inferior have not proven your claim. Period. End of story. I don't need to make a claim of my own to establish that you haven't proven your claims.

Once again, you'd fail even the most basic logic course.

The person with the burden of proof is the one who is making the claim. Since I'm not making any claims (other than the fact that you have not proven your claim, of course), I don't have a burden of proof. If you can't back up your claims, you shouldn't be making them.

And the black hole story is a stupid example - and merely demonstrates that you don't understand science any better than you understand logic. There is plenty of proof of the existence of black holes and an astronomer could prove their existence using any number of lines of evidence. That's not what's happening here. You haven't provided ANY evidence that x > y (in my example above). None. Zip. Nada.

To be specific: Have you provided evidence that Apple Maps is inferior?
http://users.elite.net/runner/jennifers/no.htm

 

Unfortunately, trying to 'prove' either position is a futile attempt. That is why I think in situations like this, it is important to keep the law of succinctness (Occam's razor) in mind.  Let's review some of the facts about iOS maps:

 

• Massive media attention to mapping flaws
• CEO publicly apologizing
• Scott Forstall fired from Apple
• Rampant end-user furor
• Authorities making public warnings about application

 

As I see it, you can make the following 2 assumptions based upon these observations:

 

1. Apple iOS maps suck
2. Apple iOS maps are great; but the media has a hidden agenda to portray Apple negatively; and the CEO wasn't actually apologizing FOR the application; and the fact that Scott Forstall was let go had nothing to do with maps; and end users will always complain regardless; and Authorities are prone to "behave irresponsibly".

 

Now, with "other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one". To me, the "simpler explanation" here is apparent....

And I demonstrated to be open to that possibility. If you don't think I refuted everything, please bring it up for further discussion and clarification.

Quote:

 

Isn't Venice pretty much all canals anyway? What roads there are are very narrow to navigate even with the Street View bike.

 

Didn't Google just unveil a ball camera strapped to a backpack in June this year? I'd expect they'll make a trip to Venice to fix this very soon.

 

I whole-heartedly agree with keeping with Occam's Razor. However, it seems others want to make it more complex than it needs to be. I'm just showing that if you use even their side of the argument, it ends up coming to the same dead end that they're trying to prove.

Nope, we're dropping the entire article because it doesn't prove anything you're claiming and it doesn't stand for your definition of objectivity (the one you haven't provided), and especially since you have already accepted that it may be subjective.


Irrelevant to the argument. There is reason to expect Apple Maps to have the same features as Google Maps, but no reason to expect the same the other way around.

Nonsense. False dichotomy argument.

In reality:

1. The media jumps all over Apple regularly. Even minor flaws are blown up into major nonsense-gates. Things that are pretty much standard for everyone else are calmly accepted - until Apple does them and then the media frenzy begins.

2. The CEO did not apologize for the app being bad. Read his letter carefully. He apologized because some consumers found that their expectations of perfection were not satisfied (specifically, he stated that the consumers expected "the best possible experience" and were disappointed that Maps did not offer "the best possible".). Since it would be impossible to offer the best POSSIBLE experience, his 'apology' is essentially what I used to say to defuse my wife's anger: "I'm sorry you're upset." It is NOT an acknowledgement that I failed in any way, nor is Cook's letter an acknowledgement that Apple's product was inferior to Google or anything else.

3. No one outside of Apple knows why Scott was fired. The publicly stated reason was that it was for lack of people skills and lack of team-building rather than any failure in the Maps. There is zero evidence that he was fired due to the Maps product.

4. End user furor - arises every time the media frenzy (1) starts. Besides, you're begging the question. What percentage of end users are unhappy with Apple's Maps program? You can't assume that just because a few loud people on forums like this one complain that it's a widespread problem. Please provide some evidence that the majority (or even a large minority) of people are unhappy with the program.

5. What evidence do you have that those authorities made a rational decision? And what evidence did they use? As I stated previously, a rational statement would have been to tell people not to rely on ANY GPS system since they have all had failures at times and to warn people to be sure to carry water and food in their cars when traveling to remote locations. Singling out a single GPS provider without any evidence that they're worse than the others is not a factual decision.

So NONE of your arguments prove what you claim they prove.

 

But the problem with your burden of proof is that it is unobtainable. That is what I'm trying to point out to you and you are clearly missing that point.

 

What I have shown is that even if you did not make the claim that Apple Maps is as good or better than Google Maps, the proof you request is something that you know that no one can provide. It's a logical fallacy. You can't even prove the reverse of the statment with the level of proof that you yourself require (again, regardless if you made the counterclaim or not).

 

If no one can meet that particular burden of proof from either side of the argument, then is it a fair one to use? No. It's like a murder trial where you are presented with all kinds of evidence that the defendant killed the victim (blood on shirt, fingerprints on murder weapon). But you refuse to convict him because there's no evidence showing a picture or video of the defendant committing the act.

 

You set the bar at a height that you know no one can meet. And then argue that since no one can meet that unobtainable level of proof, then we all must be wrong. I'm pretty sure that a failure of basic logic.

Edited by AsianBob - 12/10/12 at 4:14pm

Nice attempt to obfuscate.

Let's simplify:
1. You claimed that Apple Maps was inferior in accuracy.
2. You refuse to provide even a shred of evidence that x > y (in my example above).
3. I point out that you have failed to prove the claim you made.
4. Having lost that argument, you try to change the argument to features.

Does that about sum it up?

What's that got to do with the argument?

First, the argument was about accuracy, not features. You only changed it to features after you lost the accuracy argument.

Second, the differences in features are essentially:
1. Street view vs Fly By. Both perform essentially the same function and the choice between them is largely subjective. Neither one is likely to have any impact on safety, though.

2. Turn-by-turn directions vs. lack of turn-by-turn directions. Google's lack of turn-by-turn directions could be a serious safety matter since a lot of people are killed and injured each year by looking at their electronic devices rather than the road.

So, even with your switch to a features argument, you lose.

No, it's not.

You made an argument. It's up to you to prove that argument. So far, you haven't provided ANY evidence to prove your argument - no matter what the height of the bar.

Where is the evidence that x > y? Until you can provide that, you have not supported your argument - and it fails.

 

Ha, you can't claim "False Dichotomy", and then proceed to backup the "other" option. I'm not sure you accurately understand what a false dichotomy is...

Obviously, you don't have a clue about logic.

I was not arguing for either position. I was simply pointing out the flaws in his argument. Destroying someone else's argument does not mean that I'm necessarily taking the other side.