Yeah I remember that. Jobs even said that's a quality of Microsoft that he wished Apple had (being able to work well with others.)
Even the AT&T partnership is better for Apple than AT&T, or at least that's the impression I get. If someone doesn't buy into the expensive stuff like the text messaging then AT&T turns a thin profit.
Yes, but everyone Apple partners with turns out to be either incompetent, a backstabbing band of thieves, or even both! (M$)
i rememeber Google Maps sucked when it first came out and it took them a few years to get it working right
It still sucks, IMO. The interface is infuriating, and even more so when you consider how much functionality is being wasted because Google can't be bothered to get it right. That said, I don't think Apple is going to compete directly with Google in online mapping. For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
Yeah and that feature uses Flash
They probably have a long term contract on the iPhone Maps app so unless Apple wants to pay Google to sit on the bench, we will have that same Maps app for awhile.
No more Google Monopoly over our lives! All Apple has to do is fix their ugly user interface and make it really useful. Placebase has very strong foundation, I can only imagine what Apple can do with it.
If I had to choose between a Google Monopoly or an Apple Monopoly I would choose Google every time.
Here is a great quote from C.S. Lewis that I think describes Apple perfectly:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
OK, so that may be a bit harsh but it does describe Apple's M.O. They limit choices and features for their users' "own good". Sometimes, to a ridiculous extent.
You want to remove the branding of the most well known mapping software in the world and replace it with an unknown solution as the default on the iPhone?
I would hope so! Maps on iPhone has to be the worst bundled app of all time. Atleast for Apples standards it is. Terrible user interface and lots of bugs. Apple most likely could higher a programmer from junior high and get a better product.
Quote:
I hope you realize that every time Apple talks about the maps application, it's not called "Maps", but "Google Maps". And their name is displayed prominently. Trying to remove that from the phone (even if they can download it on the App Store) would throw a TON of people into a fit.
I really doubt that due to the quality issues. Further it is a web app and not a native app so vast improvements could be had with a focused development effort. Lastly Google maps wIll not scale well on other platforms running IPhone OS. The app needs a major update even if it remained tied to Google.
Quote:
And then you have to somehow argue to me that a start-up company is better than a company who's been working on this for years. I'm not saying it's impossible, just very difficult to prove that point.
Who Google? They haven't put much effort into it at all. Plus you are severly discounting just how innovative startups can be. If you can't recognize the viability of startups then really you are to far gone for me to prove anything to you.
Quote:
if anything, the purchase of this company is probably more about getting more data sources for the Google Maps app than anything else. It's about making their implementation of Google Maps better. I mean, the Google Maps app on the iPhone is nothing special, and uses public APIs. It's not like Google can yank control and deny access or something (they could, but they're not that dumb). I'd say it's more about making sure that the Apple implementation of Google Maps is better than the Android version.
You think? It isn't about a better Google Maps it is about being free to develop your product in competetive ways.
Wasn't the Google MAPS app on the iPhone made my Apple devs.
Yes. But I think this will benefit developers the most. Apple might be have licensing issues with Google Maps, remember that developers need to use their own maps if they want to build a turn by turn GPS app.
It still sucks, IMO. The interface is infuriating, and even more so when you consider how much functionality is being wasted because Google can't be bothered to get it right. That said, I don't think Apple is going to compete directly with Google in online mapping. For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
Explain to me the value of Street Views for mapping software? I really don't get that one. One of the big issues is that much of Street View is non static, so unless Google wants to drive those silly cars around forever it isn't very useful.
Not to mention many people see it as an invasion of privacy on a grand scale. Apple could gain points just by taking a public position that they won't engage in privacy invasion with their solution. The fact that something is legal, to some extent or other, does not imply that people like it.
In anyevent the whole point of such apps is to find things and places of interest. The successful app will be the one that does this reliable while covering the widest array of interests. Apple has a very good chance of doing this very well.
Maps or not what I really find funny here is that Apple bought out this entire company like four months ago and nobody seemed to notice. Especially the rumor sites of which I visit many.
Steveo must be laughing up a storm right now and be extreme happy to have pulled this off without creating a stir. Really impressive of Apple to pull this off for so long.
Explain to me the value of Street Views for mapping software? I really don't get that one. One of the big issues is that much of Street View is non static, so unless Google wants to drive those silly cars around forever it isn't very useful.
Not useful to you perhaps, but extremely useful to me -- but then I deal with buildings for a living, so it saves me many a trip into the field. All of the data has freshness issues. In fact one of the big problems is that they don't provide the date of the satellite photos. This is known I presume, they just don't bother telling us. They don't seem to be updated very frequently either.
The "privacy" issues are bogus. All of these photos are taken from public streets where nobody could have any reasonable expectations of privacy.
The API for the new Maps will allow developers around the world to create customizations to it with various layers and other data for download from the App Store This is much better for the iPhone. The possibilities are endless. http://www.pushpin.com/api/1.3/docs/
Companies are surprisingly slow to realize how big location services will be.
I'm still waiting for Apple to include Lat/Lon fields in Address Book. How is that not an increasingly important piece of information for anyone with a GPS (such as, say, in their fancy touch-screen mobile phone) who wants to navigate to a location without having to enter the full address first?
I hope you realize that every time Apple talks about the maps application, it's not called "Maps", but "Google Maps". And their name is displayed prominently. Trying to remove that from the phone (even if they can download it on the App Store) would throw a TON of people into a fit.
I'm personally a little surprised to see how people are reacting to this. Google Maps is a great application/platform and I don't have reason to believe that Google would try to backstab Apple—so I don't really see why some of this Google hostility is starting to brew—but I'm also optimistic about where Apple could go with this acquisition.
It is interesting to see your alternative perspective in support of Google, but I think you're strongly overestimating Apple's position here. The 'TON' of people out there is Apple's demographic, and that is not represented here much at all. That 'TON' of people, if they are even familiar with Google Maps, will automatically assume that any map application that offers similar functionality is Google Maps. The rest don't know, and don't care—they just want a maps application.
The people who do know Google Maps and understand its importance—the sort of folks we have here—are not a comparatively large group of Apple's demographic, and we don't really offer opposition either. We're not going to rebel just because Apple abandoned Google (in this scenario). We're going to scrutinize Apple's replacement app to see if it offers more or less than what they were able to offer with Google. If they offer more, we'll be thrilled. If they offer less, we'll be critical, but it won't have anything to do with branding. It will be about features.
What is an application for which a tablet would be extremely well suited? Viewing and following maps, of course! SatNavs are all very well, but there is also a place for a larger format map which could have much more information on it than any SatNav could manage.
In Apple's home state of California, it would be illegal just to have a tablet computer located anywhere in the front seating area--turned on or turned off--let alone to be using it.
In Apple's home state of California, it would be illegal just to have a tablet computer located anywhere in the front seating area--turned on or turned off--let alone to be using it.
The "privacy" issues are bogus. All of these photos are taken from public streets where nobody could have any reasonable expectations of privacy.
Several European countries disagree with you. Even in the U.S., I think there's a reasonable expectation that a large company won't put your picture on the internet for profit without permission. (The law may or may not agree with me but that doesn't mean people still don't have that expectation.) There's absolutely no reason they can't "scrub" faces, they just don't want to invest the resources in doing it. Not that Google has ever had much consideration for privacy, or the law.
Several European countries disagree with you. Even in the U.S., I think there's a reasonable expectation that a large company won't put your picture on the internet for profit without permission. (The law may or may not agree with me but that doesn't mean people still don't have that expectation.) There's absolutely no reason they can't "scrub" faces, they just don't want to invest the resources in doing it. Not that Google has ever had much consideration for privacy, or the law.
Which ones?
Anyhow I am confused by your response. You seem to believe that Google is a serial lawbreaker, but that they aren't breaking the law.
Reasonable expectation of privacy is a well-established principle of U.S. Constitutional law. The courts have been careful to not allow it to go crazy. If it was extended as you suggest, every photo you took on any public street could be subject to a lawsuit. Is that really what you want?
Comments
Yeah I remember that. Jobs even said that's a quality of Microsoft that he wished Apple had (being able to work well with others.)
Even the AT&T partnership is better for Apple than AT&T, or at least that's the impression I get. If someone doesn't buy into the expensive stuff like the text messaging then AT&T turns a thin profit.
Yes, but everyone Apple partners with turns out to be either incompetent, a backstabbing band of thieves, or even both! (M$)
I'm all for Apple start getting independent.
i rememeber Google Maps sucked when it first came out and it took them a few years to get it working right
It still sucks, IMO. The interface is infuriating, and even more so when you consider how much functionality is being wasted because Google can't be bothered to get it right. That said, I don't think Apple is going to compete directly with Google in online mapping. For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
It still sucks, IMO. ...
For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
Yeah and that feature uses Flash
They probably have a long term contract on the iPhone Maps app so unless Apple wants to pay Google to sit on the bench, we will have that same Maps app for awhile.
No more Google Monopoly over our lives! All Apple has to do is fix their ugly user interface and make it really useful. Placebase has very strong foundation, I can only imagine what Apple can do with it.
If I had to choose between a Google Monopoly or an Apple Monopoly I would choose Google every time.
Here is a great quote from C.S. Lewis that I think describes Apple perfectly:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
OK, so that may be a bit harsh but it does describe Apple's M.O. They limit choices and features for their users' "own good". Sometimes, to a ridiculous extent.
-kpluck
You want to remove the branding of the most well known mapping software in the world and replace it with an unknown solution as the default on the iPhone?
I would hope so! Maps on iPhone has to be the worst bundled app of all time. Atleast for Apples standards it is. Terrible user interface and lots of bugs. Apple most likely could higher a programmer from junior high and get a better product.
I hope you realize that every time Apple talks about the maps application, it's not called "Maps", but "Google Maps". And their name is displayed prominently. Trying to remove that from the phone (even if they can download it on the App Store) would throw a TON of people into a fit.
I really doubt that due to the quality issues. Further it is a web app and not a native app so vast improvements could be had with a focused development effort. Lastly Google maps wIll not scale well on other platforms running IPhone OS. The app needs a major update even if it remained tied to Google.
And then you have to somehow argue to me that a start-up company is better than a company who's been working on this for years. I'm not saying it's impossible, just very difficult to prove that point.
Who Google? They haven't put much effort into it at all. Plus you are severly discounting just how innovative startups can be. If you can't recognize the viability of startups then really you are to far gone for me to prove anything to you.
if anything, the purchase of this company is probably more about getting more data sources for the Google Maps app than anything else. It's about making their implementation of Google Maps better. I mean, the Google Maps app on the iPhone is nothing special, and uses public APIs. It's not like Google can yank control and deny access or something (they could, but they're not that dumb). I'd say it's more about making sure that the Apple implementation of Google Maps is better than the Android version.
You think? It isn't about a better Google Maps it is about being free to develop your product in competetive ways.
Dave
It sounds like Apple and google are headed towards a nasty separation.
I don't buy that.
Apple want to figure out your location to put you at the specific started point in the current book you've selected - based on cultural persuasion!
Wasn't the Google MAPS app on the iPhone made my Apple devs.
Yes. But I think this will benefit developers the most. Apple might be have licensing issues with Google Maps, remember that developers need to use their own maps if they want to build a turn by turn GPS app.
It still sucks, IMO. The interface is infuriating, and even more so when you consider how much functionality is being wasted because Google can't be bothered to get it right. That said, I don't think Apple is going to compete directly with Google in online mapping. For one thing, they don't have the street view images. They must have some other ideas for how to use this tech.
Explain to me the value of Street Views for mapping software? I really don't get that one. One of the big issues is that much of Street View is non static, so unless Google wants to drive those silly cars around forever it isn't very useful.
Not to mention many people see it as an invasion of privacy on a grand scale. Apple could gain points just by taking a public position that they won't engage in privacy invasion with their solution. The fact that something is legal, to some extent or other, does not imply that people like it.
In anyevent the whole point of such apps is to find things and places of interest. The successful app will be the one that does this reliable while covering the widest array of interests. Apple has a very good chance of doing this very well.
Dave
Steveo must be laughing up a storm right now and be extreme happy to have pulled this off without creating a stir. Really impressive of Apple to pull this off for so long.
Dave
Explain to me the value of Street Views for mapping software? I really don't get that one. One of the big issues is that much of Street View is non static, so unless Google wants to drive those silly cars around forever it isn't very useful.
Not useful to you perhaps, but extremely useful to me -- but then I deal with buildings for a living, so it saves me many a trip into the field. All of the data has freshness issues. In fact one of the big problems is that they don't provide the date of the satellite photos. This is known I presume, they just don't bother telling us. They don't seem to be updated very frequently either.
The "privacy" issues are bogus. All of these photos are taken from public streets where nobody could have any reasonable expectations of privacy.
Companies are surprisingly slow to realize how big location services will be.
I'm still waiting for Apple to include Lat/Lon fields in Address Book. How is that not an increasingly important piece of information for anyone with a GPS (such as, say, in their fancy touch-screen mobile phone) who wants to navigate to a location without having to enter the full address first?
I hope you realize that every time Apple talks about the maps application, it's not called "Maps", but "Google Maps". And their name is displayed prominently. Trying to remove that from the phone (even if they can download it on the App Store) would throw a TON of people into a fit.
I'm personally a little surprised to see how people are reacting to this. Google Maps is a great application/platform and I don't have reason to believe that Google would try to backstab Apple—so I don't really see why some of this Google hostility is starting to brew—but I'm also optimistic about where Apple could go with this acquisition.
It is interesting to see your alternative perspective in support of Google, but I think you're strongly overestimating Apple's position here. The 'TON' of people out there is Apple's demographic, and that is not represented here much at all. That 'TON' of people, if they are even familiar with Google Maps, will automatically assume that any map application that offers similar functionality is Google Maps. The rest don't know, and don't care—they just want a maps application.
The people who do know Google Maps and understand its importance—the sort of folks we have here—are not a comparatively large group of Apple's demographic, and we don't really offer opposition either. We're not going to rebel just because Apple abandoned Google (in this scenario). We're going to scrutinize Apple's replacement app to see if it offers more or less than what they were able to offer with Google. If they offer more, we'll be thrilled. If they offer less, we'll be critical, but it won't have anything to do with branding. It will be about features.
What is an application for which a tablet would be extremely well suited? Viewing and following maps, of course! SatNavs are all very well, but there is also a place for a larger format map which could have much more information on it than any SatNav could manage.
In Apple's home state of California, it would be illegal just to have a tablet computer located anywhere in the front seating area--turned on or turned off--let alone to be using it.
In Apple's home state of California, it would be illegal just to have a tablet computer located anywhere in the front seating area--turned on or turned off--let alone to be using it.
Citation for this claim, please.
The "privacy" issues are bogus. All of these photos are taken from public streets where nobody could have any reasonable expectations of privacy.
Several European countries disagree with you. Even in the U.S., I think there's a reasonable expectation that a large company won't put your picture on the internet for profit without permission. (The law may or may not agree with me but that doesn't mean people still don't have that expectation.) There's absolutely no reason they can't "scrub" faces, they just don't want to invest the resources in doing it. Not that Google has ever had much consideration for privacy, or the law.
Several European countries disagree with you. Even in the U.S., I think there's a reasonable expectation that a large company won't put your picture on the internet for profit without permission. (The law may or may not agree with me but that doesn't mean people still don't have that expectation.) There's absolutely no reason they can't "scrub" faces, they just don't want to invest the resources in doing it. Not that Google has ever had much consideration for privacy, or the law.
Which ones?
Anyhow I am confused by your response. You seem to believe that Google is a serial lawbreaker, but that they aren't breaking the law.
Reasonable expectation of privacy is a well-established principle of U.S. Constitutional law. The courts have been careful to not allow it to go crazy. If it was extended as you suggest, every photo you took on any public street could be subject to a lawsuit. Is that really what you want?