Your putting words in mouth like always, I never said it was pathetic. In fact I said it's probably wonderful filled with wonder and cool effects but at the end of the day me personally will always just go to the little Google box that's in Safari and ask for directions or use the SAT NAV in my car.
Because this is the only thread you've ever commented negatively on Apple¡ :shakeshead
Google has been collecting data for the last 7 years for their map info, Apple just now started. That is unless Apple is leasing the info from Google.
Yes and in seven years they have photographed my house three times, so anyone with enough money to outfit the rigs and send them out there can get up to speed in a couple years.
Because this is the only thread you've ever commented negatively on Apple¡ :shakeshead
It's just the mobile stuff I have a problem with, you know that. Not everything a company makes has to be perfect. I don't want to fight anymore, my heart monitor is starting to beep at me. I love you all, have a good night. Will pick this up later when Apple releases this super new map program that will make me question my existence.
I wan't lying or making things up Google signed a deal with GeoEye back in 2008 to get exclusive imagery and the sat photos for most of the world except for places like China or Russia are newer then 3 years old.
I was easily able to verify your claim with the additional information. Interesting though. The GeoEye One Orbiter was the highest resolution satellite imagery commercially available at the time (and may still be). While this seems amazing, the resolution is only 41 cm. Still impressive but not revolutionary. Google Maps (formerly Where 2 Technologies) is impressive as the standard bearer for other reasons.
Apple (formerly C3 Technologies) has resolution as high as 10 cm and is rendered using a highly advanced algorithm rather than crowd sourcing the effort from amateurs. Apple's technology is based on (relatively) recently declassified missile targeting technology. In fact, the technology Apple uses is so advanced they are able to generate street level views with the same data as three dimensional views rather than having to drive along every road and capture still photography.
Of course we're all ignoring how all this stuff will be completely worthless when even just one more of the GPS satellites breaks down, because no government or person on Earth can afford to put another one up there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everyone, upon reading the above
…What? What in the world are you talking about?
Come to think of it, I guess that was on different forum. Apparently the number of GPS satellites up there is the absolute bare minimum needed to keep the system running, and if so much as one more fails, the whole thing will be worthless because "no one can afford to send more satellites up there".
Wish I knew more about what he was talking about so that I could properly deride such nonsense, but there's probably an inkling of truth to it somewhere.
… Sorry, just wanted to defuse some of this tension here.
I was easily able to verify your claim with the additional information. Interesting though. The GeoEye One Orbiter is the highest resolution satellite imagery commercially available. While this seems amazing, the resolution is only 41 cm. Still impressive but not revolutionary. Google Maps (formerly Where 2 Technologies) is impressive as the standard bearer for other reasons.
Apple (formerly C3 Technologies) has resolution as high as 10 cm and is rendered using a highly advanced algorithm rather than crowd sourcing the effort from amateurs. Apple's technology is based on (relatively) recently declassified missile targeting technology. In fact, the technology Apple uses is so advanced they are able to generate street level views with the same data as three dimensional views rather than having to drive along every road and capture still photography.
Yes I know that, however you need to go back and look at the percentage of the earth covered by said tech. Less then 40% has been released, granted it does cover most of the US and Europe so I guess that's all we should care about. Plus how often is that declassified images released, they don't say nor could I find any info on that. Not as often as a orbiting satellite with a contract I can tell you that much. Whatever, I succeed or whatever the English word for give up is. Okay sweety, the meds are kicking in and I need to sleep. Goodnight, sleep well you guys.
In fact, the technology Apple uses is so advanced they are able to generate street level views with the same data as three dimensional views rather than having to drive along every road and capture still photography.
It'll be interesting to see how images captured from aircraft instead of satellites and cars compare. I can see several pros and cons for C3 v. Street View. While Street View will give you that head-level image of the side of a street I can't say I've found that to be very useful although I'm sure others have.
Then there is the issue of coverage. Has C3 and/or Apple done flyovers of all roads in the US or just the major cities at this point? It seems to me that basic satellite coverage will have to intermixed with the C3 tech which I think is why they have acquired so many mapping companies.
I reckon it's more likely to be a software feature to sell the iPhone 5s in 2013, much like they did with Siri for 4S.
It's weird to think that they'd market a sixth gen. iPhone and then follow it up with an iPhone 5S. Or are you implying that the sixth gen. iPhone will be released in 2013?
Maps, I understand... Or, remember (more accurately)...
...But what's a "gas station"?
I edited because I think the photo itself will suffice as a response, but maybe gas station is a southern colloquialism? We call soft drinks sodas here too. Or maybe I don't follow you.
I edited because I think the photo itself will suffice as a response, but maybe gas station is a southern colloquialism? We call soft drinks sodas here too. Or maybe I don't follow you.
Nah, we call them gas stations here too, and I'm nowhere near the South. I imagine the UK and former colonies would call them 'petrol stations' or a variation thereof.
I edited because I think the photo itself will suffice as a response, but maybe gas station is a southern colloquialism? We call soft drinks sodas here too. Or maybe I don't follow you.
I was just being snide... Where I live (lalaland north) there are markets, mini-marts (7/11, etc.) Costco, WalMart... That sell everything from chips, soda (pop), hohos, slurpys,, quick picks, pizza slices... And gasoline.
They, can't check my oil, or the air in my tires...
They are refueling stations -- but for people, not for cars!
Yes I know that, however you need to go back and look at the percentage of the earth covered by said tech. Less then 40% has been released, granted it does cover most of the US and Europe so I guess that's all we should care about. Plus how often is that declassified images released, they don't say nor could I find any info on that. Not as often as a orbiting satellite with a contract I can tell you that much. Whatever, I succeed or whatever the English word for give up is. Okay sweety, the meds are kicking in and I need to sleep. Goodnight, sleep well you guys.
The imagery wasn't declassified the mathematical algorithms were declassified. The imagery is generated similarly to most of Google's data, low level aerial photography.
Actually, satellite imagery data isn't very effective on a massive scale at high resolution. Satellite imagery is effective at low resolution but satellites move too fast to capture images of large cities rapidly especially with the resolution Google (or Apple) require. Google is likely using the satellite imagery to remove artifacts (clouds) and obtain low resolution views.
I was able to research and discover that Google is using the satellite data for high resolution images of specific structures, typically points of interest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It'll be interesting to see how images captured from aircraft instead of satellites and cars compare. I can see several pros and cons for C3 v. Street View. While Street View will give you that head-level image of the side of a street I can't say I've found that to be very useful although I'm sure others have.
Then there is the issue of coverage. Has C3 and/or Apple done flyovers of all roads in the US or just the major cities at this point? It seems to me that basic satellite coverage will have to intermixed with the C3 tech which I think is why they have acquired so many mapping companies.
Just visit the Nokia Maps website. Apple (formerly C3 Technologies) has photorealistic data.
Please understand that the Apple technology can generate images from virtually any angle viewing virtually any direction at many different altitudes including a "street view."
Apple doesn't need to do aerial photography of the entire Earth at this point, they already have licensed the data just like Google. The architecture and execution is highly complex for an amazingly simple concept:
Placebase = Google Maps with high customization and incredible APIs
Poly9 = Google Earth prior to Google SketchUp (Google's 3D modeling program)
C3 Technologies = Google Earth with Google an automated high resolution version of SketchUp
In other words, Apple has 2D and 3D map data for the entire planet just the same as Google. Much like Google, Apple has high resolution 3D images of a very small percentage of the planet and such data is typically for very large metropolitan areas the difference is that Apple's data is rendered via advanced mathematical algorithm rather than partially by hand.
Apparently, Apple is using Waze for crowd-sourced traffic data.
If you compare the data you will see that Google SketchUp provides a building facade rendered using a partially manual 3D modeling technique while Apple's technology renders the data automatically. Google Earth may render trees somewhat better but many buildings aren't rendered at all since the effort is partially manual. Apple's technology is virtually 100% automated with similar quality but once an area has been rendered the entire area including all structures are rendered.
While this is a nice upgrade to satellite view; I hope this isn't the only mode that it can operate in.
Most of the time when I use maps, I want to quickly see where a road is going or what it intersects. Photo-realistic maps may be very pretty, but quickly identifying and disguishing roads and other features from everything else is not something they excel at. So I hope that there's still a high-contrast vector drawn mode for those uses.
Sometimes I like browsing around maps, just to see places I've never been, this would be great for that. But when I'm busy, and just want to get somewhere, I'm sorry but I want a 2D birds-eye view map with a path drawn on it.
Comments
Because this is the only thread you've ever commented negatively on Apple¡ :shakeshead
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Google has been collecting data for the last 7 years for their map info, Apple just now started. That is unless Apple is leasing the info from Google.
Yes and in seven years they have photographed my house three times, so anyone with enough money to outfit the rigs and send them out there can get up to speed in a couple years.
It's just the mobile stuff I have a problem with, you know that. Not everything a company makes has to be perfect. I don't want to fight anymore, my heart monitor is starting to beep at me. I love you all, have a good night. Will pick this up later when Apple releases this super new map program that will make me question my existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
I wan't lying or making things up Google signed a deal with GeoEye back in 2008 to get exclusive imagery and the sat photos for most of the world except for places like China or Russia are newer then 3 years old.
I was easily able to verify your claim with the additional information. Interesting though. The GeoEye One Orbiter was the highest resolution satellite imagery commercially available at the time (and may still be). While this seems amazing, the resolution is only 41 cm. Still impressive but not revolutionary. Google Maps (formerly Where 2 Technologies) is impressive as the standard bearer for other reasons.
Apple (formerly C3 Technologies) has resolution as high as 10 cm and is rendered using a highly advanced algorithm rather than crowd sourcing the effort from amateurs. Apple's technology is based on (relatively) recently declassified missile targeting technology. In fact, the technology Apple uses is so advanced they are able to generate street level views with the same data as three dimensional views rather than having to drive along every road and capture still photography.
Of course we're all ignoring how all this stuff will be completely worthless when even just one more of the GPS satellites breaks down, because no government or person on Earth can afford to put another one up there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everyone, upon reading the above
…What? What in the world are you talking about?
Come to think of it, I guess that was on different forum. Apparently the number of GPS satellites up there is the absolute bare minimum needed to keep the system running, and if so much as one more fails, the whole thing will be worthless because "no one can afford to send more satellites up there".
Wish I knew more about what he was talking about so that I could properly deride such nonsense, but there's probably an inkling of truth to it somewhere.
… Sorry, just wanted to defuse some of this tension here.
Yes I know that, however you need to go back and look at the percentage of the earth covered by said tech. Less then 40% has been released, granted it does cover most of the US and Europe so I guess that's all we should care about. Plus how often is that declassified images released, they don't say nor could I find any info on that. Not as often as a orbiting satellite with a contract I can tell you that much. Whatever, I succeed or whatever the English word for give up is. Okay sweety, the meds are kicking in and I need to sleep. Goodnight, sleep well you guys.
Then there is the issue of coverage. Has C3 and/or Apple done flyovers of all roads in the US or just the major cities at this point? It seems to me that basic satellite coverage will have to intermixed with the C3 tech which I think is why they have acquired so many mapping companies.
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2010/01/map-photo-6.jpeg
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
As far as Bank of America, have you tried using the User Agent? I have had major success with that in the past though not always.
Good idea. I always forget about that (although I would rather they fix the site.)
Maps, I understand... Or, remember (more accurately)...
...But what's a "gas station"?
It's weird to think that they'd market a sixth gen. iPhone and then follow it up with an iPhone 5S. Or are you implying that the sixth gen. iPhone will be released in 2013?
Silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Maps, I understand... Or, remember (more accurately)...
...But what's a "gas station"?
I edited because I think the photo itself will suffice as a response, but maybe gas station is a southern colloquialism? We call soft drinks sodas here too. Or maybe I don't follow you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
I edited because I think the photo itself will suffice as a response, but maybe gas station is a southern colloquialism? We call soft drinks sodas here too. Or maybe I don't follow you.
Nah, we call them gas stations here too, and I'm nowhere near the South. I imagine the UK and former colonies would call them 'petrol stations' or a variation thereof.
I was just being snide... Where I live (lalaland north) there are markets, mini-marts (7/11, etc.) Costco, WalMart... That sell everything from chips, soda (pop), hohos, slurpys,, quick picks, pizza slices... And gasoline.
They, can't check my oil, or the air in my tires...
They are refueling stations -- but for people, not for cars!
A petrol bunk. Truly.
:-p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Yes I know that, however you need to go back and look at the percentage of the earth covered by said tech. Less then 40% has been released, granted it does cover most of the US and Europe so I guess that's all we should care about. Plus how often is that declassified images released, they don't say nor could I find any info on that. Not as often as a orbiting satellite with a contract I can tell you that much. Whatever, I succeed or whatever the English word for give up is. Okay sweety, the meds are kicking in and I need to sleep. Goodnight, sleep well you guys.
The imagery wasn't declassified the mathematical algorithms were declassified. The imagery is generated similarly to most of Google's data, low level aerial photography.
Actually, satellite imagery data isn't very effective on a massive scale at high resolution. Satellite imagery is effective at low resolution but satellites move too fast to capture images of large cities rapidly especially with the resolution Google (or Apple) require. Google is likely using the satellite imagery to remove artifacts (clouds) and obtain low resolution views.
I was able to research and discover that Google is using the satellite data for high resolution images of specific structures, typically points of interest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It'll be interesting to see how images captured from aircraft instead of satellites and cars compare. I can see several pros and cons for C3 v. Street View. While Street View will give you that head-level image of the side of a street I can't say I've found that to be very useful although I'm sure others have.
Then there is the issue of coverage. Has C3 and/or Apple done flyovers of all roads in the US or just the major cities at this point? It seems to me that basic satellite coverage will have to intermixed with the C3 tech which I think is why they have acquired so many mapping companies.
Just visit the Nokia Maps website. Apple (formerly C3 Technologies) has photorealistic data.
Please understand that the Apple technology can generate images from virtually any angle viewing virtually any direction at many different altitudes including a "street view."
Apple doesn't need to do aerial photography of the entire Earth at this point, they already have licensed the data just like Google. The architecture and execution is highly complex for an amazingly simple concept:
Placebase = Google Maps with high customization and incredible APIs
Poly9 = Google Earth prior to Google SketchUp (Google's 3D modeling program)
C3 Technologies = Google Earth with Google an automated high resolution version of SketchUp
In other words, Apple has 2D and 3D map data for the entire planet just the same as Google. Much like Google, Apple has high resolution 3D images of a very small percentage of the planet and such data is typically for very large metropolitan areas the difference is that Apple's data is rendered via advanced mathematical algorithm rather than partially by hand.
Apparently, Apple is using Waze for crowd-sourced traffic data.
If you compare the data you will see that Google SketchUp provides a building facade rendered using a partially manual 3D modeling technique while Apple's technology renders the data automatically. Google Earth may render trees somewhat better but many buildings aren't rendered at all since the effort is partially manual. Apple's technology is virtually 100% automated with similar quality but once an area has been rendered the entire area including all structures are rendered.
While this is a nice upgrade to satellite view; I hope this isn't the only mode that it can operate in.
Most of the time when I use maps, I want to quickly see where a road is going or what it intersects. Photo-realistic maps may be very pretty, but quickly identifying and disguishing roads and other features from everything else is not something they excel at. So I hope that there's still a high-contrast vector drawn mode for those uses.
Sometimes I like browsing around maps, just to see places I've never been, this would be great for that. But when I'm busy, and just want to get somewhere, I'm sorry but I want a 2D birds-eye view map with a path drawn on it.
Betcha it won't be called the iPhone 5, but rather the "New iPhone"
People need to quit with the iPhone 5 bs...