Well worth taking a look at it. Just as every tablet gets compared to the iPad, any Apple navigation app (tho vaporware for now) would be put next to Google's app for judgement. As Mr. Jobs said, you can't know if you fail or succeed if you don't have anything to compare to.
It's unclear if they are trying to update the app or create their own location services backend. If it's the ladder, I don't see how the data and features could match Google maps. Do they want to sever all ties?
Well if it is the ladder, that might have something to do with Apple's stated intention of taking their maps "to the next level."
This isn't about benefits to the Apple user. Instead it's Apple formulating the best way to encourage (or bribe) their users to allow location reporting to aid in Apple's delivery of targeted advertising, taking a page from Google. LBS will be adding billions to someone's bottom line by 2015. Apple wants a piece of that.
So this is about the money, with the consumer benefit just being the hook. Of course isn't it always?
That's quite an assured analysis of Apple's strategy to be based on nothing.
That's quite an assured analysis of Apple's strategy to be based on nothing.
It's an opinion based on much more than "nothing". If Apple didn't see billions of potential revenue from mapping and navigation, they wouldn't be wasting their time with it. There's already several good navigation apps in their AppStore. This is all about the money. Dangle the carrot of free or very inexpensive mapping and directions in return for users agreeing to send their travel and location stats to Apple, enabling targeted ads or whatever else Apple can find value in.
It's an opinion based on much more than "nothing". If Apple didn't see billions of potential revenue from mapping and navigation, they wouldn't be wasting their time with it. There's already several good navigation apps in their AppStore. This is all about the money. Dangle the carrot of free or very inexpensive mapping and directions in return for users agreeing to send their travel and location stats to Apple, enabling targeted ads or whatever else Apple can find value in.
So I guess we can assume that from now on any and all improvements by Apple to any and all services and software will be motivated by potential billions in targeted advertising? Since they already have good versions of most services and software and otherwise they wouldn't be wasting their time on it?
So I guess we can assume that from now on any and all improvements by Apple to any and all services and software will be motivated by potential billions in targeted advertising? Since they already have good versions of most services and software and otherwise they wouldn't be wasting their time on it?
That's pretty much it, tho not always an advertising angle. If there's already good services available, and Apple won't make some significant revenue from making an investment in that same field, pissing off the existing developer's in the process, Apple aint' doin' it. Doesn't make it wrong, but that's the way business works. Unless you're Google you don't give value away for free. There's going to be money in it for Apple.
That's pretty much it, tho not always an advertising angle. If there's already good services available, and Apple won't make some significant revenue from making an investment in that same field, pissing off the existing developer's in the process, Apple aint' doin' it. Doesn't make it wrong, but that's the way business works. Unless you're Google you don't give value away for free. There's going to be money in it for Apple.
Um, OK, but what happened to "adding value to the platform" which last time I checked was how Apple makes 99% of its money? Why is it not possible that Apple would want to improve location/mapping services for the same reason they improve iOS or OS X or any of their applications or any of their services, or for that matter their hardware? Which is to make their products more desirable so they can sell more of them? Why do location/mapping improvements have to be predicated on selling billions of dollars in iAds?
I'm not saying Apple would be adverse to selling more ads, I just absolutely reject the opinion that that represents their only possible motivation for improving services.
Um, OK, but what happened to "adding value to the platform" which last time I checked was how Apple makes 99% of its money? Why is it not possible that Apple would want to improve location/mapping services for the same reason they improve iOS or OS X or any of their applications or any of their services, or for that matter their hardware? Which is to make their products more desirable so they can sell more of them? Why do location/mapping improvements have to be predicated on selling billions of dollars in iAds?
I'm not saying Apple would be adverse to selling more ads, I just absolutely reject the opinion that that represents their only possible motivation for improving services.
Because of the investment required, at least a billion or more as a guess (and probably with an " 's " on the end), to duplicate services that are already avialable on the iPhone, albeit from 3rd party sources like TomTom, Garmin, Navigon (still Garmin) and the like. Since they already profit from those third party developers, and those apps already "add value to the platform", why would they in effect send them packing, forget about their money and lose their good will? They wouldn't unless they could see potential $Billions of revenue from an investment that's going to have major continuous costs associated with it. And they won't recoup those costs by charging a couple of dollars for a navigation app, if they charge anything at all.
Because of the investment required, at least a billion or more as a guess (and probably with an " 's " on the end), to duplicate services that are already avialable on the iPhone, albeit from 3rd party sources like TomTom, Garmin, Navigon (still Garmin) and the like. Since they already profit from those third party developers, and those apps already "add value to the platform", why would they in effect send them packing, forget about their money and lose their good will? They wouldn't unless they could see potential $Billions of revenue from an investment that's going to have major continuous costs associated with it. And they won't recoup those costs by charging a couple of dollars for a navigation app, if they charge anything at all.
Apple has never hesitated to spend lots of money when they think they can do it better and provide a more polished experience for their customers. Advertising money has never entered into it.
Recouping costs by charging isn't the point; improving the all over experience is the point.
Apple has never hesitated to spend lots of money when they think they can do it better and provide a more polished experience for their customers. Advertising money has never entered into it.
Recouping costs by charging isn't the point; improving the all over experience is the point.
They don't spend billions to prove a point. They proved themselves a long time ago.
Apple's goal is not providing a more polished experience for their customers as the endgame. It's how they can maximize the profits from their products, charging as much as the market will bear. If those value's can be buried with the retail price of an iPhone then it looks great to the customer. Since they can't charge anymore than they already do, how do you see them recouping the investment of several billion in map creation, correction and updating costs, along with building/updating a navigation solution better than the old pros like Tomtom and Garmin can offer (when they feel like it).
If you're curious about the cost involved with mapping, take a look at Tomtom, Nokia, or Garmin financials. And those costs are for updating and maintaining an existing map and/or building on years of experience with navigation applications, traffic study and reporting and public transit schedules and systems, antenna engineering and user travel preferences and tendencies.
Imagine the costs starting from scratch, then add licensing fees for the associated patents, and for what reason if you already have well-received developer solutions for the same services? Because there's billions in ad revenue that requires specific location and travel for Apple mobile device owners if it's to be attractive to advertisers.
Yes, I guess you're right. Apple would never spend a lot of money to improve their offerings without knowing they could make it back in ads, because that's just how they roll. iTunes? Ad city. iCloud? Ditto. And of course iOS, OS X and Apple's sweeping portfolio of apps don't count because that stuff is cheap to develop, market and maintain. In fact, I think it would be fair to say that Apple's entire business model hinges on using ads to subsidize their investments in user experience. Because they don't really care about user experiences so much as money, and their customers can't tell the difference.
So your'e right, Apple is playing Google's game now, and we can never again take Google to task for being an advertising company, because guess what? So is Apple!
Most or all of the feature requests here are already in Google Maps and Navigation for Android. Excellent voice recognition (100% accurate in six months for me). I just open Nav in the car and speak a place and it starts speaking turn by turn to me. And I don't need to be picky. It's Google. Just a name of something like a state park and that's it. Always gets it. Same thing with points of interest in the immediate area. Google has a great database.
Google Maps in general, however, on the desktop browser has a poor interface IMO. It seems Google lacks cartographers or user interface experts. I mean...the frickin' Google Map has no LEGEND. None. Google it if you don't believe me. Users have had to create unofficial ones. I guess they must have one hidden somewhere, but they ain't sharing it. And the only brilliant thing they had, was 3rd party "mapplets" which were apps that worked on Google Maps, and they killed them last year. They were awesome. Get lat/long, get address at a point, measure distance/area (now in Labs), etc. Display Soil Survey, topo contours of a set interval, etc. I'm still in shock. I used that for work a lot. They were setting themselves up to be the ArcGIS of online mapping. (the standard, in other words). Apple probably has even less cartographers on staff. I hope they channel their philosophy of discoverable interfaces toward mapping. However, I chose my Droid because ironically I found it easier to use and more intuitive than iOS. Particularly the phone part, and the mapping part.
Well...I hope the Google/Apple rivalry produces better mapping products on both platforms. I wish they'd both work more with ESRI, in fact. Actually...whoa. just got a crazy idea. Apple..buys ESRI. That'd be quite the coup. And probably cheaper than the Google buying Motorola deal. Any GIS people here, what do they think of that? Plus, ArcGIS for Mac would be sweet. über sweet. Gatorguy I think you're right. Apple can not make a serious mapping product without buying a mapping company. Perhaps ESRI would be too large and not mesh with Apple, but maybe they could buy Garmin or some other company that is more focused on software. Heh, they should've bought Keyhole.
Yes, I guess you're right. Apple would never spend a lot of money to improve their offerings without knowing they could make it back in ads, because that's just how they roll. iTunes? Ad city. iCloud? Ditto. And of course iOS, OS X and Apple's sweeping portfolio of apps don't count because that stuff is cheap to develop, market and maintain. In fact, I think it would be fair to say that Apple's entire business model hinges on using ads to subsidize their investments in user experience. Because they don't really care about user experiences so much as money, and their customers can't tell the difference.
So your'e right, Apple is playing Google's game now, and we can never again take Google to task for being an advertising company, because guess what? So is Apple!
No need to push it to the exrteme that Apple is all about ads now. I'm not making that claim and you shouldn't understand it that way.
Unlike all the other Apple features you mentioned, maps and navigation depends on location. LBS value depends on knowing where you are, and if an advertiser know where you're going that's a bonus. So Apple wants to know where you are and where you're going too. iCloud or iTunes users have no reason to allow Apple access to that, and they're not going to tell Apple they're on the way to Best Buy. But Apple navigation or maps users could be persuaded. And that's hugely valuable in monetizing LBS and the related ad revenue.
That's why maps and navigation for a company like Apple or Google is all about offering you a cookie (free navigation) in return for sharing where you are and where you go. Google is proof positive of the value.
Allow the user to exclude certain roads that the user specifies.
Better user input. Voice recognition would be great. "Route path from home to 36 Elm Street."
Turn by turn audio output that has preference settings that allow user to set frequency of audio outputs. For example, you can tell it to only identify major turns.
Multiple destinations in one route
better integration with search, voice search,
better holders for the phone sideways
while traveling your route , a simple gesture for "facilities at next exit"
my garmin shows me crap behind me, no what's next exit for gas, food make it a preference
i want the least distractions following this thing
I'd like to see several GIS/RS software suites have a native Mac version. I hate VM-ing to Win 7 for GIS/RS tasks... (PS - ArcGIS and Erdas Imagine on my new 27" iMac i7 w/ SSD are orders of magnitude faster than on my previous quad xeon Lenovo ThinkStation workstation. It screams! I would be happy to if I never had to log into Windows ever again. But, alas...)
I'd like to see several GIS/RS software suites have a native Mac version. I hate VM-ing to Win 7 for GIS/RS tasks... (PS - ArcGIS and Erdas Imagine on my new 27" iMac i7 w/ SSD are orders of magnitude faster than on my previous quad xeon Lenovo ThinkStation workstation. It screams! I would be happy to if I never had to log into Windows ever again. But, alas...)
Sorry for the digression....
Not a digression. Maps make the world go 'round!
I'm rocking XP in Fusion to do Arc myself for grad school. Slooow. I am planning to get an SSD, just waiting for prices to drop. Glad to hear it gives screaming performance!
Comments
http://www.google.com/mobile/navigation/
Well worth taking a look at it. Just as every tablet gets compared to the iPad, any Apple navigation app (tho vaporware for now) would be put next to Google's app for judgement. As Mr. Jobs said, you can't know if you fail or succeed if you don't have anything to compare to.
every truck or commercial vehicle has a need for an easy mapping guide. there is an open door for a provider.
I'm still waiting.
Considering most store clerks cant' even give change without the cash register telling them what the amount is.... it's probably pretty hard.
What do you do? are you into quantum physics?
I'm an accountant. But I know Google did it, TomTom did it. Why can't apple do it?
Just because I can't code a navigation app does not mean it's not easy for a company that specializes in software to code a navigation app.
Oh and BTW I am currently using Navigon for navigation, but I would like to see apple maps to grow in features.
It's unclear if they are trying to update the app or create their own location services backend. If it's the ladder, I don't see how the data and features could match Google maps. Do they want to sever all ties?
Well if it is the ladder, that might have something to do with Apple's stated intention of taking their maps "to the next level."
This isn't about benefits to the Apple user. Instead it's Apple formulating the best way to encourage (or bribe) their users to allow location reporting to aid in Apple's delivery of targeted advertising, taking a page from Google. LBS will be adding billions to someone's bottom line by 2015. Apple wants a piece of that.
So this is about the money, with the consumer benefit just being the hook. Of course isn't it always?
That's quite an assured analysis of Apple's strategy to be based on nothing.
That's quite an assured analysis of Apple's strategy to be based on nothing.
It's an opinion based on much more than "nothing". If Apple didn't see billions of potential revenue from mapping and navigation, they wouldn't be wasting their time with it. There's already several good navigation apps in their AppStore. This is all about the money. Dangle the carrot of free or very inexpensive mapping and directions in return for users agreeing to send their travel and location stats to Apple, enabling targeted ads or whatever else Apple can find value in.
http://www.pyramidresearch.com/store...d-Services.htm
http://uk.thewherebusiness.com/fc_th...cID=0&cValue=1
It's an opinion based on much more than "nothing". If Apple didn't see billions of potential revenue from mapping and navigation, they wouldn't be wasting their time with it. There's already several good navigation apps in their AppStore. This is all about the money. Dangle the carrot of free or very inexpensive mapping and directions in return for users agreeing to send their travel and location stats to Apple, enabling targeted ads or whatever else Apple can find value in.
http://www.pyramidresearch.com/store...d-Services.htm
http://uk.thewherebusiness.com/fc_th...cID=0&cValue=1
So I guess we can assume that from now on any and all improvements by Apple to any and all services and software will be motivated by potential billions in targeted advertising? Since they already have good versions of most services and software and otherwise they wouldn't be wasting their time on it?
So I guess we can assume that from now on any and all improvements by Apple to any and all services and software will be motivated by potential billions in targeted advertising? Since they already have good versions of most services and software and otherwise they wouldn't be wasting their time on it?
That's pretty much it, tho not always an advertising angle. If there's already good services available, and Apple won't make some significant revenue from making an investment in that same field, pissing off the existing developer's in the process, Apple aint' doin' it. Doesn't make it wrong, but that's the way business works. Unless you're Google you don't give value away for free. There's going to be money in it for Apple.
Where is "Find My Friends"? (the Apple version)
I'm still waiting.
I already explained where it is the last time you asked this.
That's pretty much it, tho not always an advertising angle. If there's already good services available, and Apple won't make some significant revenue from making an investment in that same field, pissing off the existing developer's in the process, Apple aint' doin' it. Doesn't make it wrong, but that's the way business works. Unless you're Google you don't give value away for free. There's going to be money in it for Apple.
Um, OK, but what happened to "adding value to the platform" which last time I checked was how Apple makes 99% of its money? Why is it not possible that Apple would want to improve location/mapping services for the same reason they improve iOS or OS X or any of their applications or any of their services, or for that matter their hardware? Which is to make their products more desirable so they can sell more of them? Why do location/mapping improvements have to be predicated on selling billions of dollars in iAds?
I'm not saying Apple would be adverse to selling more ads, I just absolutely reject the opinion that that represents their only possible motivation for improving services.
Um, OK, but what happened to "adding value to the platform" which last time I checked was how Apple makes 99% of its money? Why is it not possible that Apple would want to improve location/mapping services for the same reason they improve iOS or OS X or any of their applications or any of their services, or for that matter their hardware? Which is to make their products more desirable so they can sell more of them? Why do location/mapping improvements have to be predicated on selling billions of dollars in iAds?
I'm not saying Apple would be adverse to selling more ads, I just absolutely reject the opinion that that represents their only possible motivation for improving services.
Because of the investment required, at least a billion or more as a guess (and probably with an " 's " on the end), to duplicate services that are already avialable on the iPhone, albeit from 3rd party sources like TomTom, Garmin, Navigon (still Garmin
Because of the investment required, at least a billion or more as a guess (and probably with an " 's " on the end), to duplicate services that are already avialable on the iPhone, albeit from 3rd party sources like TomTom, Garmin, Navigon (still Garmin
Apple has never hesitated to spend lots of money when they think they can do it better and provide a more polished experience for their customers. Advertising money has never entered into it.
Recouping costs by charging isn't the point; improving the all over experience is the point.
Apple has never hesitated to spend lots of money when they think they can do it better and provide a more polished experience for their customers. Advertising money has never entered into it.
Recouping costs by charging isn't the point; improving the all over experience is the point.
They don't spend billions to prove a point. They proved themselves a long time ago.
Apple's goal is not providing a more polished experience for their customers as the endgame. It's how they can maximize the profits from their products, charging as much as the market will bear. If those value's can be buried with the retail price of an iPhone then it looks great to the customer. Since they can't charge anymore than they already do, how do you see them recouping the investment of several billion in map creation, correction and updating costs, along with building/updating a navigation solution better than the old pros like Tomtom and Garmin can offer (when they feel like it).
If you're curious about the cost involved with mapping, take a look at Tomtom, Nokia, or Garmin financials. And those costs are for updating and maintaining an existing map and/or building on years of experience with navigation applications, traffic study and reporting and public transit schedules and systems, antenna engineering and user travel preferences and tendencies.
Imagine the costs starting from scratch, then add licensing fees for the associated patents, and for what reason if you already have well-received developer solutions for the same services? Because there's billions in ad revenue that requires specific location and travel for Apple mobile device owners if it's to be attractive to advertisers.
So your'e right, Apple is playing Google's game now, and we can never again take Google to task for being an advertising company, because guess what? So is Apple!
Google Maps in general, however, on the desktop browser has a poor interface IMO. It seems Google lacks cartographers or user interface experts. I mean...the frickin' Google Map has no LEGEND. None. Google it if you don't believe me. Users have had to create unofficial ones. I guess they must have one hidden somewhere, but they ain't sharing it. And the only brilliant thing they had, was 3rd party "mapplets" which were apps that worked on Google Maps, and they killed them last year. They were awesome. Get lat/long, get address at a point, measure distance/area (now in Labs), etc. Display Soil Survey, topo contours of a set interval, etc. I'm still in shock. I used that for work a lot. They were setting themselves up to be the ArcGIS of online mapping. (the standard, in other words). Apple probably has even less cartographers on staff. I hope they channel their philosophy of discoverable interfaces toward mapping. However, I chose my Droid because ironically I found it easier to use and more intuitive than iOS. Particularly the phone part, and the mapping part.
Well...I hope the Google/Apple rivalry produces better mapping products on both platforms. I wish they'd both work more with ESRI, in fact. Actually...whoa. just got a crazy idea. Apple..buys ESRI. That'd be quite the coup. And probably cheaper than the Google buying Motorola deal. Any GIS people here, what do they think of that? Plus, ArcGIS for Mac would be sweet. über sweet. Gatorguy I think you're right. Apple can not make a serious mapping product without buying a mapping company. Perhaps ESRI would be too large and not mesh with Apple, but maybe they could buy Garmin or some other company that is more focused on software. Heh, they should've bought Keyhole.
Yes, I guess you're right. Apple would never spend a lot of money to improve their offerings without knowing they could make it back in ads, because that's just how they roll. iTunes? Ad city. iCloud? Ditto. And of course iOS, OS X and Apple's sweeping portfolio of apps don't count because that stuff is cheap to develop, market and maintain. In fact, I think it would be fair to say that Apple's entire business model hinges on using ads to subsidize their investments in user experience. Because they don't really care about user experiences so much as money, and their customers can't tell the difference.
So your'e right, Apple is playing Google's game now, and we can never again take Google to task for being an advertising company, because guess what? So is Apple!
No need to push it to the exrteme that Apple is all about ads now. I'm not making that claim and you shouldn't understand it that way.
Unlike all the other Apple features you mentioned, maps and navigation depends on location. LBS value depends on knowing where you are, and if an advertiser know where you're going that's a bonus. So Apple wants to know where you are and where you're going too. iCloud or iTunes users have no reason to allow Apple access to that, and they're not going to tell Apple they're on the way to Best Buy. But Apple navigation or maps users could be persuaded. And that's hugely valuable in monetizing LBS and the related ad revenue.
That's why maps and navigation for a company like Apple or Google is all about offering you a cookie (free navigation) in return for sharing where you are and where you go. Google is proof positive of the value.
My wish list
better integration with search, voice search,
better holders for the phone sideways
while traveling your route , a simple gesture for "facilities at next exit"
my garmin shows me crap behind me, no what's next exit for gas, food make it a preference
i want the least distractions following this thing
integrate voice texting with it
Plus, ArcGIS for Mac would be sweet. über sweet.
+1
I'd like to see several GIS/RS software suites have a native Mac version. I hate VM-ing to Win 7 for GIS/RS tasks... (PS - ArcGIS and Erdas Imagine on my new 27" iMac i7 w/ SSD are orders of magnitude faster than on my previous quad xeon Lenovo ThinkStation workstation. It screams! I would be happy to if I never had to log into Windows ever again. But, alas...)
Sorry for the digression....
+1
I'd like to see several GIS/RS software suites have a native Mac version. I hate VM-ing to Win 7 for GIS/RS tasks... (PS - ArcGIS and Erdas Imagine on my new 27" iMac i7 w/ SSD are orders of magnitude faster than on my previous quad xeon Lenovo ThinkStation workstation. It screams! I would be happy to if I never had to log into Windows ever again. But, alas...)
Sorry for the digression....
Not a digression. Maps make the world go 'round!
I'm rocking XP in Fusion to do Arc myself for grad school. Slooow. I am planning to get an SSD, just waiting for prices to drop. Glad to hear it gives screaming performance!