Apple avoids showcasing Google Maps in promotional material for new iPad
As further evidence that Apple plans to transition away from Google Maps in iOS, the company uploaded to its Web servers but chose not to publish images of Google's mapping data on the new iPad.
On the "Features" section of Apple's website promoting the new iPad, the company has a side-by-side comparison simulating the iPad 2 display as compared to the Retina display on the new iPad. The site showcases three iOS applications: iBooks, Photos and Mail.
Viewing the file names of the "Retina Gallery" images shows that they are identified with numbers. AppleInsider reader Pierre-Arnaud pointed out on Tuesday that the iBooks images are labeled as "1" and screenshots of "Photos" are "2," but the images of the Mail application are saved with the "retina_gallery_4" filename.
That means the JPG files labeled "3" were originally planned as part of the imagery, but were eventually left out of the promotional material on the finalized website.
However, the filename for "retina_gallery_3" can be manually entered into a Web browser to access the images that Apple uploaded to its website. These show that the files labeled "3" were actually screenshots of the Maps application running on iOS.
The uploaded-but-unpublished screenshot shows directions from the Louvre Museum in Paris, France, to the Eiffel Tower via Google Maps for iPad.
The specific exclusion of Maps from the promotional material is noteworthy because Apple's map software for iOS still relies on mapping data from Google. There have been numerous indications that Apple plans to transition away from Google Maps in iOS in favor of its own mapping solutions.
Most recently, Apple chose not to use Google Maps for mapping data in the new iOS version of iPhoto. Instead, Apple has implemented data from the OpenStreetMap Foundation.
Apple has also acquired a number of mapping companies in recent years, including Poly9 in 2010 and Placebase in 2009. The company also revealed in 2010 that Apple had begun using its own databases for location-based services, although it continues to rely on Google for maps and the Street View feature.
Apple even publicly revealed last year that it is working on an "improved traffic service" for the iPhone, based on location-based data it has been collecting. The "crowd-sourced traffic database" has been tested by Apple with anonymous traffic data it has collected from iPhone users.
Further potential justification for Apple to transition away from Google Maps came last year, when Google announced also announced it will begin to charge partners who heavily use its Maps application programming interface. The search giant will charge $4 per 1,000 views for partners who serve up more than 25,000 uses per day of the Google Maps API.
On the "Features" section of Apple's website promoting the new iPad, the company has a side-by-side comparison simulating the iPad 2 display as compared to the Retina display on the new iPad. The site showcases three iOS applications: iBooks, Photos and Mail.
Viewing the file names of the "Retina Gallery" images shows that they are identified with numbers. AppleInsider reader Pierre-Arnaud pointed out on Tuesday that the iBooks images are labeled as "1" and screenshots of "Photos" are "2," but the images of the Mail application are saved with the "retina_gallery_4" filename.
That means the JPG files labeled "3" were originally planned as part of the imagery, but were eventually left out of the promotional material on the finalized website.
However, the filename for "retina_gallery_3" can be manually entered into a Web browser to access the images that Apple uploaded to its website. These show that the files labeled "3" were actually screenshots of the Maps application running on iOS.
The uploaded-but-unpublished screenshot shows directions from the Louvre Museum in Paris, France, to the Eiffel Tower via Google Maps for iPad.
The specific exclusion of Maps from the promotional material is noteworthy because Apple's map software for iOS still relies on mapping data from Google. There have been numerous indications that Apple plans to transition away from Google Maps in iOS in favor of its own mapping solutions.
Most recently, Apple chose not to use Google Maps for mapping data in the new iOS version of iPhoto. Instead, Apple has implemented data from the OpenStreetMap Foundation.
Apple has also acquired a number of mapping companies in recent years, including Poly9 in 2010 and Placebase in 2009. The company also revealed in 2010 that Apple had begun using its own databases for location-based services, although it continues to rely on Google for maps and the Street View feature.
Apple even publicly revealed last year that it is working on an "improved traffic service" for the iPhone, based on location-based data it has been collecting. The "crowd-sourced traffic database" has been tested by Apple with anonymous traffic data it has collected from iPhone users.
Further potential justification for Apple to transition away from Google Maps came last year, when Google announced also announced it will begin to charge partners who heavily use its Maps application programming interface. The search giant will charge $4 per 1,000 views for partners who serve up more than 25,000 uses per day of the Google Maps API.
Comments
I can hardly wait to see them get annihalated.
Has anyone ever developed a vector-based map where all the map data is saved on your phone so you don't need a mobile phone signal to load it? And the digital compass and GPS also works perfectly without slow data connections, why hasn't this been done? iPhone's and iPads surely have enough GB's to store the maps, even if they just allowed you to store by state or country?
Has anyone ever developed a vector-based map where all the map data is saved on your phone so you don't need a mobile phone signal to load it? And the digital compass and GPS also works perfectly without slow data connections, why hasn't this been done? iPhone's and iPads surely have enough GB's to store the maps, even if they just allowed you to store by state or country?
You mean, a GPS app like Navigon? There are plenty, you just have to pay for them.
Give me a better search engine than Google and I will gladly move away...
Has anyone ever developed a vector-based map where all the map data is saved on your phone so you don't need a mobile phone signal to load it? And the digital compass and GPS also works perfectly without slow data connections, why hasn't this been done? iPhone's and iPads surely have enough GB's to store the maps, even if they just allowed you to store by state or country?
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/you-n...415545903?mt=8
But that uses OpenStreetMap.
I hope Apple don't rely on OpenStreetMap! It's not very acurate (I search for my house using my postcode (zip code) and it wasn't correct. I also searched a business and nothing came up and most of all it's ugly...
Google hasn't had my suburban house number correct for years (and those of all of my immediate neighbours).
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6697975/loupehr3.jpg
Looks smart. Looking forward to Friday. :-)
Just maps like Google Maps that allow searching of businesses and addresses and clear directions with accurate GPS.
Just maps. With businesses and addresses. With clear directions. And GPS.
But not a navigation app.
Right.
Has anyone ever developed a vector-based map where all the map data is saved on your phone so you don't need a mobile phone signal to load it?
Skobbler ?
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gps-n...370144231?mt=8
does just that.
You also have OffMaps that relies on the same DB. For not so regular users and/or when going to exotic countries often the only choice
That means the JPG files labeled "3" were originally planned as part of the imagery, but were eventually left out of the promotional material on the finalized website.
This part of the story is speculation, as is the headline.
I routinely generate tons of graphics in the early phase of a project. Some make the final cut, some don't. That doesn't necessarily mean that I am "avoiding" showing them.
The speculation is likely true but it is still speculation. Being accurate wouldn't be as sensational though... anything to raise the click count apparently.
It just occurred to me how awesome a mapping app will be with the new display if you can see the same level of detail but with 4x more coverage.
I speculated that we might see the new Maps app before iOS 6 because the iPad, especially one with a Retina Display, is the perfect way to showcase it. It only occurred to me later that Apple can still showcase it on an iPad when they introduce iOS 6.
That'd be worth the extra $130 for the LTE model so I get a GPS receiver even if I don't subscribe to data
That's one of the reasons I bought it. I hope TomTom are close to getting their map app updated for the Retina Display.
Or maybe they decided it just wasn't that interesting and was a poor way to showcase the Retina Display. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy of Apple sticking it to Google.
That certainly needs to be considered. Even if we do get new Apple maps this year (and I think we will) that still won't prove the exclusion of Maps from from the site's demo.
That means the JPG files labeled "3" were originally planned as part of the imagery, but were eventually left out of the promotional material on the finalized website.
This part of the story is speculation, as is the headline.
That is the part of the story that seems absolutely accurate. What are the chances they uploaded images 1, 2, and 4 for this iPad page but uploaded image 3 for some other purpose. The simple answer seems to be that they did plan to include it.
That is the part of the story that seems absolutely accurate. What are the chances they uploaded images 1, 2, and 4 for this iPad page but uploaded image 3 for some other purpose. The simple answer seems to be that they did plan to include it.
Orphaned graphics and other web components are not uncommon. A very tiny percentage of these are the result of high-level strategic decisions to pull content.
The speculation is possibly, maybe even likely true. But not "absolutely".
Orphaned graphics and other web components are not uncommon.
That's my point. The sentence you quoted only states it had been planned and then it waseft out. There is no claim there as to the why.
Orphaned graphics and other web components are not uncommon. A very tiny percentage of these are the result of high-level strategic decisions to pull content.
The speculation is possibly, maybe even likely true. But not "absolutely".
Are you saying it is absolutely possible? Or an absolute possibility? Or do you think it could possibly be absolutely so?
Are you saying it is absolutely possible? Or an absolute possibility? Or do you think it could possibly be absolutely so?
Absolutely.