or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Launch of Google Maps for iPhone viewed as a 'mixed blessing' for Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Launch of Google Maps for iPhone viewed as a 'mixed blessing' for Apple - Page 5

post #161 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

I don't think I ever said that Apple didn't screw the pooch on Apple Maps. I said it was overblown.

The apology and the firing of an employee cannot necessarily be construed as evidence of this.

So, if Apple themselves admitting to having a problem can not necessarily be construed as evidence of that, then what would you consider evidence? Don't start talking about objective comparisons here, such a thing is unlikely to exist due to the size of the dataset, thus making your claim an appeal to ignorance.
post #162 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan View Post

Google is as transparent as you can get. They clearly outline everything they are doing in their privacy agreements and you can opt out of everything, which I have done.


... and those court cases...   lol.gif

Which ones?
post #163 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Of course you would try to evade this issue.  lol.gif

http://www.siliconvalley.com/ci_22011088/google-privacy-settlement-ftc-seems-headed-court-approval

Hmmmm... transparent... sure...  lol.gif

Fool me once...

That's not a case of lack of transparency, unless you accept the notion that Apple, too, lacks transparency, because otherwise you will have to explain the double standard in the light of the location data that [URL=http://************/2011/04/20/ios-secretly-storing-your-location-data-say-researchers/]Apple was found to be storing without permission on iOS[/URL].

AppleInsider seems to have problems with nine to five mac dot com links; I'll leave my post like because it's just ridiculous.
post #164 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisely View Post

I don't understand the analyst's logic.  From google's perspective, the best scenario is for Apple to have never kicked Google map out.  The worst scenario is for Apple to replace Google Map with a killer map app.  Both scenarios didn't materialise.  But under current circumstances, how can Google be better off in any sense compared to Apple not removing Google map in IOS6?

That's not the conclusion. The conclusion is that Google still came out winning in the current situation. As far as Google is concerned, they don't give a crap whether you're running Android, iOS, Windows Phone, or anything really, as long as you're using their services. By having an app on iOS, as well as the trust of many iOS users (such as myself), Google wins out, not only because they came out as saviors in the eyes of the consumers by giving back what Apple took from iOS without asking for anything in return, but also because they got to have the features they originally wanted Apple to implement on iOS and over which Apple decided to ditch them. Had Apple rejected Google Maps after having admitted to screwing up in their own mapping service, that would have been regarded by many as a strong sign of unwillingness to cooperate, not only with other companies, but also with their customers' demands.
post #165 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post

Note that Google is inherently untrustworthy, that's because they are interested in selling your data and keeping you as long and as often as possible in 'ad land'. It's comparable to MS first loyalty to companies instead of the customers they sell the software to..

Not comparable since they aren't selling you anything. They're providing you with free services. Any company is inherently untrustworthy when they do that, even Apple (you dn't pay extra for Apple's Maps).
post #166 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

What Steve Jobs wouldn't have allowed was a native maps app that had Google's branding. Makes perfect sense to me considering Google is one of Apple's biggest competitors. It blows my mind that people would expect Apple to allow this.

You keep saying it makes sense without actually explaining it. Why shouldn't Apple accept Google-branded software? It's not even like there wasn't already Google-branded software in the app store back when Jobs was alive... You really have to justify your belief, because currently it is completely unfound; claiming that it "makes sense" without demonstrating how is irrational.
post #167 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

Google Maps is an outright malediction for iOS.  I urge Apple fans not to use it.

I don't get the logic in this: why should Apple fans not use it unless they're idiots? What reason is there to purposely cripple yourself over brand loyalty? Does Apple pay you to be a fan? Because they don't pay me and actually charge me a lot more than the competition, so if I'm really missing something here and there's money to be made, I'd like to learn how! Perhaps then I would understand the generally retarded bias on this forum...
post #168 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

How dare you suggest that Google is anything but 100% perfect or ever had issues. We all know that Google was birthed full form and issue free some 7 plus years ago and has been that way ever since. You are all liars and should be ashamed of yourselves. 

Can you please link to a post, article, or anything at all with someone claiming that Google is "100% perfect"?
post #169 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by razormaid View Post

I guess I'm missing something here. Everyone keeps complaining about MAPS by Apple, but I have never had any problems. I love the turn by turn feature. We put it up against our navigator in the car and it got us there, where the car navigator got lost. The place we were going to has been around for 76 years, so it's not like it was a new place, or new street to find. Apple MAPS just did it better. Had we followed the one in the car we would have had to call the place we were going to - it took us to the middle of the desert and said "You've arrived at your destination". HUH? Meanwhile, Apple MAPS kept going getting us there.
So maybe in some areas it's not good, but traveling in California, Arizona and Nevada - no problems on Apple's MAPS.

No, you're not missing anything.

There is an army of people out there who attack Apple relentlessly no matter how good the products are.

The situation is simple:
Apple maps have x errors.
Google maps have y errors.

In spite of all the screaming about Apple's maps, no one has yet provided any evidence that x is greater than y, much less that any difference is significant.

Nobody needs to; Apple deserves all the criticism since they effectively removed Google Maps from iOS to replace it with their own solution, meaning they are expected to perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere. Apple put themselves in such a position, they only have themselves to blame for it. Google didn't replace anything, they never put themselves in a position that would lead people to expect their solution to be better than anyone else's.
post #170 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

Once again, you fail to see what's really happening right before your eyes.

Your ignorance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

The fact is that Google failed to keep it's former IOS app "up to snuff" with it's other offerings to Android and was dragging it's feet in fixing it (which is it's privilege).

Two errors in this statement. For starters, the app was developed by Apple, not Google (it only used Google as a back-end), and secondly it stagnated because Apple refused to accept conditions that Google imposed, and as a third-party can implement on its own app, in exchange for extra services for iOS. If anyone dragged their feet here, that was Apple. Google got what they wanted in the end -- a native iOS app in the app store with ads and full integration with their services on top of good reputation for giving back what Apple took with all the features people wanted.
post #171 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesmcd View Post

I tried using Google's turn-by-turn yesterday in New Zealand and gave up after 5 minutes. What a disaster - it simply couldn't locate me once I'd started moving and then went on a mental rant giving me sporadic directions from all around the city. Hopefully they get this sorted...

If it couldn't locate you, that's more than likely an issue with your GPS' synchronization than Google Maps. Apps don't have direct access to any kind of location data or hardware; everything has to either go through a core C API implemented by Apple or the kernel. If the APIs don't provide information, the apps can't make it up. Switching to a different app won't change anything since all the data comes from the same place; you may notice a difference later because once the GPS has cached everything it needs from the satellites it won't need to do it again for a very long time unless you stop using it for extended periods of time.
post #172 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Except for little things like not honoring my Safari settings to block cookies (they didn't tell me they were doing that) I was geting Google cookies though I NEVER went to a Google website or used Google search. Or driving around recording people's wi-fi broadcasts. Or publishing authors' works without permission. Or etc. etc. and who knows what else that they haven't told us about yet. There will plenty more fines for Google's violations of privacy laws before too long.

How many sites are you aware of that warn you about the cookies that they set on your system? Also, what makes you think that not going to a Google site means anything? The sites you visit can have Google stuff on them, and I can tell you that right now you are accessing a site with Google ads on it (AppleInsider). Whose responsibility is to warn people about that? Google's (which you aren't even accessing directly) or the site that you are accessing? And if you refuse to answer this question due to it not being convenient to your argument, then how can you claim that this represents lack of transparency?
post #173 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Hill60, If you're having some difficulty in figuring out how to turn off location and tracking in iOS6 I don't think you're alone. Most users probably have no idea that Apple sets location and tracking 'On" by default (So much for user privacy). IMO Apple is intentionally making it hard to opt out by putting the switches in odd places, areas where most users would never think to look, assuming they had any idea they needed to. 

Actually, the choice on whether to enable Location Services is one of the very first questions iOS 5 and 6 ask you during the setup process, even following a backup restore; also, the setting to turn it off globally is right there in the Settings main menu on iOS 5 (though it's harder to find on iOS 6).
post #174 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

How come when people want to praise the old Apple maps app, it's called 'Google Maps' and when they want to criticize the same app, it's suddenly attributed to Apple again??

Perhaps because Apple developed the app using Google Maps as the back-end?
post #175 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

Most people do not understand the concept that doing the right thing can never be wrong, in the long term. So it goes with Apple, it's obviously the right thing to do to have google maps available, why not? Now Apple has some breathing space and is in a position to do real damage to Google in the long term by simply making their own mapping product unbelievable excellent, which is bound to happen eventually.

If you forget the fact that the only ones being damaged in this case are Apple, as they gain absolutely nothing with the current strategy. Had they chosen a completely different path, such as to cooperate with Google and integrate their entire range of services into iOS rather than creating MobileMe / iCloud / Apple Maps, everyone would be winning. This way, Apple is the only losing party because they are investing in services that they never needed to.
post #176 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post

Not comparable since they aren't selling you anything. They're providing you with free services. Any company is inherently untrustworthy when they do that, even Apple (you dn't pay extra for Apple's Maps).

It is comparable, because the companies interest isn't aligned with that of the consumer.
That's the point I made.
Apples interest is as aligned - as it can get - with that of is customers.
Of course Apple would like to sell you as much devices as they can and that is something a consumer has to watch out for. But this is easy to see and easy to get, Googles hidden agenda isn't that obvious (hence the hidden) and not at all made clear by the company. The same goes for MS, they say they have you - as a consumer - in mind but they have a company focus instead.
So the fact that Googles and MS interest isn't aligned at all with that of it's customers makes them inherently untrustworthy.

J.
post #177 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisely View Post


1wink.gif ...no need for this step....

When I was installing Google Map, the privacy and term of use popped up.  I read through the terms carefully and found the box for allowing "Location Data Collection".  I untick it immediately.

Even if it is ticked it won't be of much use.  I am happy with Apple Map and won't use Google map very much.

Your right, I initially allowed it. It's not as easy to 'uncheck' afterwards.
I'am also happy with Apple maps and hope improvements like a Siri voice navigation and better search will arrive soon. It's important to have a valid alternative for Googles ad infested universe.

J.
post #178 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

... It might be more reasonable to say that, on average, Google Maps will be more accurate than Apple Maps at this time, ...

 

It might be reasonable if there were data to base it on, but, what little solid data I'm aware of, does not at all support that assertion. 

post #179 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

It could possibly have something to do with licensing restrictions. Google uses data from sources other than their own who may not allow repackaging of their map data for a turn-by-turn application to be built by a third party. ...

 

As usual, a load of bull from GG. At this point, we all know that Google was using turn-by-turn as a bargaining chip to gain access to personal data, and Apple told them to stuff it. Please stop it with the constant rewriting of history.

post #180 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan View Post

 

At 71% global market share, android does not need the minor competitive edge that the real google maps app gives. They've already won. They're an ad company that makes money on volume. To that end, it's not even a contest.

 

Except when they don't make money on volume, like with Android. Financially, Google would have been much better off if they had never gotten involved in Android.

post #181 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan View Post

 

Google is as transparent as you can get. They clearly outline everything they are doing in their privacy agreements and you can opt out of everything, which I have done.

 

If only that were true. Google never stops tracking you no matter what you do. All you can "opt out" of is seeing ads based on that data, they still collect it.

 

Google is the least transparent, most dishonest, least trustworthy enterprise I've ever seen. Nothing more than a criminal enterprise that ought to be prosecuted under the RICO laws.

post #182 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan View Post

 

I say again, Google allows for the opt out of tracking cookies among other opt outs. And as AsianBob pointed out, they are very transparent about what they do and don't do with the collected information. Google maintained that tracking was improper coding and was unintentional. But, who knows about that.

 

Are you ridiculously naive, or just incompetently disingenuous?

 

There was nothing inadvertent or unintentional about it, just like there was nothing inadvertent or unintentional about the WiFi snooping program. You are completely beyond the absurd with this notion of "Google's transparency". This is a criminal enterprise that has repeatedly lied to regulators and the public, attempted to cover it up, broken laws left right and center, bought their way out, ...

post #183 of 255

Was a decseptuple post really necessary? 

post #184 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Just because you say it doesn't make it true. For years to come people will be saying "if Steve Jobs was alive" and no matter how much you dislike it doesn't change perception.

 

Members of an enthusiast forum are not an accurate representation of the general public. For those that track Apple on a regular basis if they believe Steve Jobs would have done something differently and the outcome would have been better, perception is reality. Get a clue, people like you acted as if Steve Jobs was a God, guess what God doesn't get replaced for years, if ever.

 

I see you have just as much anger as always. But, sorry, his point that you are simply stuffing words into Steve Jobs mouth is entirely valid. It's easy to do, and you never take the high road, but it still makes your posts so much nonsense when you do it.

post #185 of 255

It's always amusing when you come into a thread like this late in the game and see all these posters desperately trying to blackguard Apple and spin the Google orthodoxy as truth.

post #186 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post

It is comparable, because the companies interest isn't aligned with that of the consumer.

You are not the consumer to Google; the advertisers are their clients, so, again, not comparable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post

IThat's the point I made.

And that's the point I refuted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post

IApples interest is as aligned - as it can get - with that of is customers.

Only as a hardware seller. You can't claim that iAd and the Advertiser ID, for example, have your interests in mind.
post #187 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

If only that were true. Google never stops tracking you no matter what you do. All you can "opt out" of is seeing ads based on that data, they still collect it.

Can you prove this? If not, why are you posting it?
post #188 of 255
Well obviously a advantage to Google and complaints to apple maps also can go to google.
post #189 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena View Post

There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye at first glance. When the full picture comes out, people will realize that this has nothing to do with Maps. This entire story is about Search.

When the iPhone first launched, Google was paying Apple $100M to be the default search provider on the iPhone. About 2 years back, when relationship between Apple and Google soured, Apple upped the amount to $1B - and Google had no choice but to pony up. This was a whole lot of money, but not being the default search engine on iOS would have hurt Google even more, by allowing Bing access to the high profile customer base of Apple.

Before the launch of iOS 6, Apple is said to have upped this amount to $2.5B - and really turned the screws on Google. This is really painful for Google, but they still don't have a choice, because at this point in time, iOS is still way too important, both in terms of sheer numbers, as well as the profile of customers. But $2.5B is more than what Google makes out of iOS, which means, Apple was really hurting Google bad.

Google attempted to negotiate access fees for Google Maps and Youtube - but Apple called them out, and decided to evict YouTube and Maps from iOS. The story with YouTube is very interesting - being part of iOS, the YouTube app was not allowed to offer any ads. And being a free service, Google could not stop Apple from riding on top of YouTube, without indulging in anti-competitive practices. During the iOS 6 stand-off, Google decided to make up for the removal of YouTube by launching its own app, with ads. This was a no-brainer, because Google would actually make a lot of money doing this.

But when it came to Maps, the scenario was totally different. Google is not releasing Maps for iOS in an attempt to collect information about users on iOS. While that is useful, the benefit to Google from having a much better Maps implementation on Android (thereby adding a lot of value to Android) was a lot more. However, Google realized that the army of iOS users were helping Apple rapidly eliminate inaccuracies in iOS6 Maps. It was just a question of time before iOS6 maps became usable - literally months away. Absolutely the only way for Google to stop that from happening, was to release their own Maps app on iOS, in an attempt to slow down the momentum of corrections in iOS6 maps. If most customers had a very good alternative, there would be zero incentive for them to use iOS6 maps, and report inaccuracies. It is this motive that prompted Google to release iOS6 maps.

Paradoxically, Google Maps on iOS6 makes the iPhone the best mapping platform - and the only platform where you can access multiple mapping solutions from Apple, Google, Nokia, for free. This will increase adoption of iPhone 5 and iOS6, as even the doubters now have no reason to hold back.

And the worst part from Google's perspective, is that Apple can still up their demands for keeping Google as the default search engine on iOS. Google literally has no option but to pay up. The only way for Google to avoid this threat is to dramatically increase market share of Android, to make iOS devices.

And removing Google as default search engine will have even lesser repercussions than what happened with Maps. Whoever is really pissed and misses out on Google can still continue to use Google as their search engine, while the vast majority of users would not even realize that things have changed!

The best part is, Apple won't even be missing out on the money - MS would happily pay Apple any amount for selecting Bing as the default search engine - and this money makes sense for Bing, because it is attempting to catch up on Google. For Google, paying ridiculous sums makes absolutely no sense, since they are already the market leader!

All said and done, Google has come out worst out of the entire exercise - Apple takes back all the money Google makes from iOS, and iOS users still get to use all the stuff from Google - and get even more features than they had before!

The important thing to remember is that Apple makes its money off of hardware sales. Whether the customer uses iOS6 maps, or Google Maps, makes absolutely no difference to Apple in the short term. And in the long term, Apple can work on ironing out the glitches in its maps, and offer not just a technically superior alternative, but also a more accurate alternative.

Much interesting new detail and viewpoiint. Can you indicate a source for the $2.5 figure? And are you rejecting the standard story that Google wanted too much data from Apple users before they would add TbT and street view to Apple's iOS Maps app, thus forcing Apple to develop their own? Or was it a case of a more general program on Apple's part to cut ties with Google?
post #190 of 255

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


Speaking of trolls, why are you attacking the analyst's reputation rather than his claim?
Did you know that Google Maps on iOS was developed by Apple rather than Google?
 

 

I didn't know that. Don't know that still. Because it is not true. Apple did not develop it alone.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post

Did you know that the only reason why Google Maps on iOS was worse than on Android was because Apple was unwilling to accept things that Google has implemented in the current app, such as binding to other Google services and ads?


The only reason? I didn't know that. Don't know that still. And neither do you.


Edited by ankleskater - 12/15/12 at 10:54am
post #191 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's always amusing when you come into a thread like this late in the game and see all these posters desperately trying to blackguard Apple and spin the Google orthodoxy as truth.


True. But to be fair, there are also those who defend Apple when there is no reason or need. Some are fanatical about Google. Others (a larger population) are fanatical about Apple. The truth, as usual, is somewhere in between.

post #192 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena View Post

There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye at first glance. When the full picture comes out, people will realize that this has nothing to do with Maps. This entire story is about Search.

 

When the iPhone first launched, Google was paying Apple $100M to be the default search provider on the iPhone. About 2 years back, when relationship between Apple and Google soured, Apple upped the amount to $1B - and Google had no choice but to pony up. This was a whole lot of money, but not being the default search engine on iOS would have hurt Google even more, by allowing Bing access to the high profile customer base of Apple.

 

Before the launch of iOS 6, Apple is said to have upped this amount to $2.5B - and really turned the screws on Google. This is really painful for Google, but they still don't have a choice, because at this point in time, iOS is still way too important, both in terms of sheer numbers, as well as the profile of customers. But $2.5B is more than what Google makes out of iOS, which means, Apple was really hurting Google bad.

 

Google attempted to negotiate access fees for Google Maps and Youtube - but Apple called them out, and decided to evict YouTube and Maps from iOS. The story with YouTube is very interesting - being part of iOS, the YouTube app was not allowed to offer any ads. And being a free service, Google could not stop Apple from riding on top of YouTube, without indulging in anti-competitive practices. During the iOS 6 stand-off, Google decided to make up for the removal of YouTube by launching its own app, with ads. This was a no-brainer, because Google would actually make a lot of money doing this.

 

But when it came to Maps, the scenario was totally different. Google is not releasing Maps for iOS in an attempt to collect information about users on iOS. While that is useful, the benefit to Google from having a much better Maps implementation on Android (thereby adding a lot of value to Android) was a lot more. However, Google realized that the army of iOS users were helping Apple rapidly eliminate inaccuracies in iOS6 Maps. It was just a question of time before iOS6 maps became usable - literally months away. Absolutely the only way for Google to stop that from happening, was to release their own Maps app on iOS, in an attempt to slow down the momentum of corrections in iOS6 maps. If most customers had a very good alternative, there would be zero incentive for them to use iOS6 maps, and report inaccuracies. It is this motive that prompted Google to release iOS6 maps.

 

Paradoxically, Google Maps on iOS6 makes the iPhone the best mapping platform - and the only platform where you can access multiple mapping solutions from Apple, Google, Nokia, for free. This will increase adoption of iPhone 5 and iOS6, as even the doubters now have no reason to hold back.

 

And the worst part from Google's perspective, is that Apple can still up their demands for keeping Google as the default search engine on iOS. Google literally has no option but to pay up. The only way for Google to avoid this threat is to dramatically increase market share of Android, to make iOS devices.

 

And removing Google as default search engine will have even lesser repercussions than what happened with Maps. Whoever is really pissed and misses out on Google can still continue to use Google as their search engine, while the vast majority of users would not even realize that things have changed!

 

The best part is, Apple won't even be missing out on the money - MS would happily pay Apple any amount for selecting Bing as the default search engine - and this money makes sense for Bing, because it is attempting to catch up on Google. For Google, paying ridiculous sums makes absolutely no sense, since they are already the market leader!

 

All said and done, Google has come out worst out of the entire exercise - Apple takes back all the money Google makes from iOS, and iOS users still get to use all the stuff from Google - and get even more features than they had before!

 

The important thing to remember is that Apple makes its money off of hardware sales. Whether the customer uses iOS6 maps, or Google Maps, makes absolutely no difference to Apple in the short term. And in the long term, Apple can work on ironing out the glitches in its maps, and offer not just a technically superior alternative, but also a more accurate alternative.

 

thanks much for rational thinking! there is more stupid on the web about this now than maybe ever before.

 

simple fact is Google came crawling back to Apple with a much improved Maps app because it can't afford to be kicked off iOS. likewise, MS will soon release iOS Office suite apps, because it can't afford to be left out either.

 

meanwhile, Apple will keep improving its own alternative apps too to keep up the pressure and avoid ever being dependent on anyone else.

 

Schmidt just claimed Android is "wining the war." actually, it's winning the race - the Race To The Bottom. congrats, Fool!

post #193 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


I don't get the logic in this: why should Apple fans not use it unless they're idiots? What reason is there to purposely cripple yourself over brand loyalty? Does Apple pay you to be a fan? Because they don't pay me and actually charge me a lot more than the competition, so if I'm really missing something here and there's money to be made, I'd like to learn how! Perhaps then I would understand the generally retarded bias on this forum...

 

Cheap Android phones aren't the iPhone's "competition", the high end phones Apple compete with are sold at comparable prices, that is until they are dumped in fire sales.

 

Hint when buying Android handsets wait a couple of months for the inevitable price drop, after the early adopters have been screwed.

 

Meanwhile enjoy your 480x320 or 800x480 screened, cheap gingerbread phone, like most of the rest of the world.


Edited by hill60 - 12/15/12 at 1:22pm
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #194 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


Nobody needs to; Apple deserves all the criticism since they effectively removed Google Maps from iOS to replace it with their own solution, meaning they are expected to perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere. Apple put themselves in such a position, they only have themselves to blame for it. Google didn't replace anything, they never put themselves in a position that would lead people to expect their solution to be better than anyone else's.

 

So they should retain the same errors Google maps has?

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #195 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So they should retain the same errors Google maps has?

His argument is completely warped.

I'd like to hear him argue for IE for Mac over Apple creating Safari. Sure, WebKit is the most popular browser engine now, thanks to Apple, but back when they made the switch it wasn't natively supported by sites and most sites still focused on IE's layout with about 80%(?) marketshare. If his argument holds then Apple shouldn't have ever replaced IE unless it could "perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere."

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #196 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'd like to hear him argue for IE for Mac over Apple creating Safari. Sure, WebKit is the most popular browser engine now, thanks to Apple, but back when they made the switch it wasn't natively supported by sites and most sites still focused on IE's layout with about 80%(?) marketshare. If his argument holds then Apple shouldn't have ever replaced IE unless it could "perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere."

 

Not a valid comparison.

 

Any small development group can write a web browser without ever leaving their office.  Heck, I've done it myself twice, back in the early 1990s when the web just started. 

 

Creating a Google equivalent mapping solution requires over 7,000 mapping employees and contractors worldwide to collect data, fly planes, drive cars and make corrections, over 250 specially equipped Street View cars, and a fair amount of time.

 

In other words, it was a lot easier and quicker for Apple to create Safari to replace IE, than to create a Maps solution that could replace Google Maps.  Not that Apple didn't try, of course, by buying up various mapping companies to try to speed up the process.

 

Re: webkit being popular.  True enough.  Too bad Apple's not likely to make their mapping solution available on other devices.  In fact, I think the main reason Google Maps is so good is because Google also has a web version (which Apple does not have).  Many people are more likely to submit corrections from a desktop browser than from a mobile browser on the go.  If I'd been in charge, I'd have pushed for putting out a desktop version first, either web based or not.


Edited by KDarling - 12/15/12 at 5:07pm
post #197 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Not a valid comparison.

Any small development group can write a web browser without ever leaving their office.  Heck, I've done it myself twice, back in the 1990s when the web just started. 

Creating a Google equivalent mapping solution requires over 7,000 mapping employees and contractors, over 250 specially equipped Street View cars, and years.

In other words, it was a lot easier and quicker for Apple to create Safari to replace IE, than to create a Maps solution that could replace Google Maps.  Not that Apple didn't try, of course, by buying up various mapping companies to try to speed up the process.

That wasn't his argument. He clearly stated "perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere." Does Safari perform as well as IE for Mac everywhere? Of course not. As someone who has built browser engines by yourself — or are you just claiming to have built an app around an existing engine? — you should know that you can't make it exactly the same if the backend (in regards to mapping) or the engine (in regards to a browser) is different without an excessive amount of effort. It's only since WebKit has taken hold that we've seen a good deal of uniformity in functionality and layouts for the webpages, and yet there is still much to do and each browser engine still has pros and cons.
Edited by SolipsismX - 12/15/12 at 5:08pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #198 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That wasn't his argument. He clearly stated "perform at least as well as Google Maps did everywhere." Does Safari perform as well as IE for Mac everywhere? Of course not.

 

Okay, now I am confused (or perhaps it's the antibiotics I'm on - grin).  I'm honestly not sure what you're saying.  Do you mean that they didn't have to be as good as the competition at first?

 

 

Quote:
As someone who has built browser engines by yourself — or are you just claiming to have built an app around an existing engine? — you should know that you can't make it exactly the same if the backend (in regards to mapping) or the engine (in regards to a browser) is different without an excessive amount of effort.

 

Ah, I think I see.  You're saying the output would not look the same.  Yes, of course, I don't mean that the map would look exactly alike, but certainly things like transit information could've been included in Apple's own way.

 

And yep, I meant browser engines.  I'm an old realtime embedded systems guy.  I believe in writing your own code for everything, if possible.

 

 

Quote:
It's only since WebKit has taken hold that we've seen a good deal of uniformity in functionality and layouts for the webpages, and yet there is still much to do and each browser engine still has pros and cons.

 

Isn't that the truth.  I've been writing HTML based apps since the mid 1990s, and at first we had to stick to one browser just to not go insane.  Nowadays it's better, but there sure are a lot of quirks.  Plus I'm forced to also support Firefox, which has its own bag of worms.

 

Cheers!

post #199 of 255

One common thing I see on Apple sites is people bashing Google for anonymously tracking user behaviors and using that data so advertisers can target people that might actually want their products.  Everyone knows that is what Google does.  Googles recent offerings have become more sensitive to that and tell users what is being tracked and give you the option to opt out.  In the past Google outright bypassed Apple user settings- which is unexcusable and they deserve to be roasted for it.

 

What I rarely see is anyone mentioning Apples behavior in this regard.  Apple tracks far more information about its users than Google can ever hope to find out about its users.  Since every app on an iPhone is in their ecosystem Apple knows EVERYTHING you do.  What websites you've visited, what you've bought using your phone, who you call and when, where you've been, where you bank, etc etc etc.   Apple tracks all this and essentially leaves a permanent cookie on the phone so advertisers can track anonymous information about Apple users.  Apple does not deny it is there, and if you search for it you might find it so you can't really accuse Apple of being downright dishonest.  At the same time they don't go out of their way to let you know it is there, and it is by default enabled- so rather than telling you it is there and giving you an option to opt out they simply seem to be hoping you don't know it is there and leave it enabled out of ignorance.

 

All of my friends that use an iPhone 5 have been somewhat incredulous and surprised by this and even more so when I tell them to go to their privacy screens to disable it...

 

Are they the exception and most of the Apple users here are aware of it and knew to disable it (if they so desired)?  Or are most of you surprised to learn this?

post #200 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Okay, now I am confused (or perhaps it's the antibiotics I'm on - grin).  I'm honestly not sure what you're saying.  Do you mean that they didn't have to be as good as the competition at first?

I'm saying it's nearly impossible to match or be better than a complex service/app in every regard. That is the where Vaelian's argument is warped. He's claiming that Apple should not have released their own mapping solution until that goal was passed. It's a goal that Apple should strive for but it's not one that it expected to be achieved, and in domes circumstances it may even be impossible.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Launch of Google Maps for iPhone viewed as a 'mixed blessing' for Apple