Rather than include transit and walking directions natively in the new Maps application in iOS 6, Apple will instead highlight third-party options available on the iOS App Store.
...
This is Apple being completely (and transparently) disingenuous.
The whole "let's switch from Google Maps" thing is starting to sound like a complete f*ck up from day one. What a lot of people in the USA might not appreciate, is that about 60% of the world doesn't drive cars, so while you guys are all busy obsessing over turn by turn, Apple has removed most of the functionality that *most* of the people using the maps app (world-wide anyway) rely on.
As a pedestrian and bicyclist, streetview is supremely important.
Accurate bus information is even more important than that
Walking times and directions that are integrated with the bus routes are essential.
There is no app that I'm aware of in my city to do this for me and I sure wouldn't trust it if there was.
To just send the users searching through the crap in the app store for this is unconscionable.
Absolutely ridiculous. I hate Google with a passion and everything they stand for but at this rate I will be looking for the Google Map solution on the first day I get my new iPhone
I suspect an enterprising developer could even provide, dare we say it, a street level view app. Although iOS 6 Maps doesn't need a street level view.
This is just a ridiculous thing to say.
First off maps *need* streetview. It's one of the most popular features the users use all the time.
Secondly, how is it that some developer is going to have the money to drive thousands of cars loaded with cameras all around the city (or every city). Streetview is impossible without some giant company footing the bill for the cars and staff to take the pictures.
Sounds to me like it'll be handled the same way Passbook is. You download the original app and it registers its data with Apple's system application.
The same will apply to Maps. I can download, say, a Metro Bus schedule application. It would register its data with the system through the Maps API and that information would be available to the system map and viewable in any application that makes use of the system's maps view.
This platform type architecture would allow almost any kind of information to be inserted into a map... Imagine downloading a Metro Zoo or national park app and it registers itself with the system map and allows the map to show points of interests.
The possibilities are endless.
The problem is that this also sounds incredibly complex. If I'm a middle-aged housewife with no computer knowledge and who doesn't even buy apps, and I just bought a phone and want to find out when the next bus is coming to the stop I'm standing at, previous to this move the phone would just tell me.
Now I have to download an app (what's that? how do I do that?), register it with the map? WTF? It's already way too complex.
The user shouldn't have to do anything but look at the map. If you have to do anything else at all it's a fail, or at least a step back in functionality from the original.
Now Google has that way of shooting themselves in the foot by making their own apps ridiculously and stupidly complex so perhaps their solution will also suck, but so far ... this solution from Apple is completely full to the brim with suck.
Google tries to do everything themselves because the more "services" they provide to consumers, the larger their advertising platform becomes which increases their revenue.
Apple purchased several mapping companies to reduce dependency on Google and reduce Google's revenue of which approximately USD $500 m annually is derived from the use of Google services as the infrastructure of iOS Maps.
Well, Nokia does the same thing. But they don't have a large and thriving third party navigation app market either. If you don't have one, you do it yourself.
So I could have understood it, say, two years ago, maybe three. But now it isn't really needed, except for those who simply won't pay for anything.
Google began subway routes/stops back in Feb/2007, the same time they added real-time traffic reporting. Walking directions were added in June of 2008. All of those preceded Apple's AppStore, and definitely intro'd before Google even had an app market. I don't believe those features for free from Google had anything to do with 3rd party mobile apps since there wasn't even an AppStore.
Apple's app store had nothing to do with Android. They were competing with Nokia, as they had it, from what I remember. But June 2008 was when the app store did open up.
But when did they add, not walking directions or traffic reporting, neither of which count for this discussion, but spoken turn by turn driving directions? That's what Nokia was giving. And shortly after Apple did open the app store, we began seeing turn by turn apps appear. Just one or two at first, but then a bunch. How many are on the Android platform? I think every major company has one for iOS.
That's not how crowd-sourced traffic works. It doesn't depend on users "reporting" anything. Instead it takes constantly updating location data from your device to register your travel speeds over various road classifications, combines it with others traveling that roadway plus reports from public agencies, and compares that to the historical traffic speeds for that segment for a snapshot of what they think traffic conditions are. Not foolproof but it's generally fairly effective. That's the "live" portion. They can also predict some future traffic issues with advance notice of local special events. They almost certainly are using TomTom's Live Traffic database IMO.
So yes, by agreeing to the terms for Apple maps you more than likely will be required to share your location. That would of course still be voluntary as no one forces you to accept Apple's terms of service.
I have this with my MotionX turn by turn app. I can choose to turn traffic data that comes TO me on or off, and I can choose to participate in giving back my location and speed data to their crowd sourced database. I do both. I would imaging that apples would be usefull over more places as it could be that more people would use app,e,s app that anyone else's, and so would give more data back. Unless we would be agreeing to give the data even though we weren't using Apple's turn by turn app. That would be ok by me. As long as this is anonymized, I don't care.
Apple's app store had nothing to do with Android. They were competing with Nokia, as they had it, from what I remember. But June 2008 was when the app store did open up.
But when did they add, not walking directions or traffic reporting, neither of which count for this discussion, but spoken turn by turn driving directions? That's what Nokia was giving. And shortly after Apple did open the app store, we began seeing turn by turn apps appear. Just one or two at first, but then a bunch. How many are on the Android platform? I think every major company has one for iOS.
Mel, believe your memory of events is incorrect. Nokia introduced free spoken turn-by-turn directions for some of it's Symbian phones in January/2010, a few months after Google Maps 2.0 brought the feature to Android phones in October of 2009.
Note too that Google's connected navigation service wasn't being offered by any smartphone app provider when it was announced. Not Tomtom, Sygic, Navigon nor any other Android, Symbian, iOS or Blackberry-compatible app. It had nothing to do with iOS nav providers offering similar paid features not available to Android users. What Google brought to market wasn't available from anyone else for smartphones, period.
Unless we would be agreeing to give the data even though we weren't using Apple's turn by turn app. That would be ok by me. As long as this is anonymized, I don't care.
Mel, do you personally consider data anonymized if it's tied to a UDID? I know what Apple calls it in their privacy policy. Just curious.
Mel, believe your memory of events is incorrect. Nokia introduced free spoken turn-by-turn directions for some of it's Symbian phones in January/2010, a few months after Google Maps 2.0 brought the feature to Android phones in October of 2009.
Note too that Google's connected navigation service wasn't being offered by any smartphone app provider when it was announced. Not Tomtom, Sygic, Navigon nor any other Android, Symbian, iOS or Blackberry-compatible app. It had nothing to do with iOS nav providers offering similar paid features not available to Android users. What Google brought to market wasn't available from anyone else for smartphones, period. http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/28/google-redefines-car-gps-navigation-google-maps-navigation-android/
All the article says is that that Droid model, which was the first one to come with Android 2.0 was the first Android phone to come with that. It doesn't say anything else.
Mel, do you personally consider data anonymized if it's tied to a UDID? I know what Apple calls it in their privacy policy. Just curious.
If the company keeps that UDID on record, along with the info, then no. But Apple has eliminated that practice for app makers, and they said that they didn't collect that info themselves.
All the article says is that that Droid model, which was the first one to come with Android 2.0 was the first Android phone to come with that. It doesn't say anything else.
I was posting it so you could see the features that were introduced if you were at all curious. I figured you weren't aware of all of them. As for Nokia/Navteq they were still months behind Google in offering TBT voice navigation. From Google Maps 2.0 forward it's been Nokia/Navteq chasing Google rather than the other way around.
They do exactly this, but in a low-tech way with fully user-generated content. You can go inside, outside, in a cave, wherever. Looks like they could benefit from some "appification", but they have the idea and basic tools.
My 2 cents; it's very cool, but it takes more time than many people are willing to commit to create these "places". On the other hand, it's only going to be successful if there are thousands (or millions) of regular folks out doing this and linking their places together. Something needs to get jump-started!
I contacted RealPlaces and we are in the process of evaluating what we can offer on Apple iOS. Thank you very much for the suggestion! I am very excited to help this small company grow as well as provide a service that so many feel is critical to Apple iOS.
I'm pretty sure for my city, nothing is easier than bringing up Maps and having Google tell me which bus to get on and when it leaves. Luckily I don't ride the bus much so it doesn't matter but this definitely that will be missed. I don't want to download 3rd party maps for every new city I'm instead versus just bring up Google Maps. At least Google will have a separate app so I can use their maps when needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyb0731
This is disappointing. I was always much more likely to use the walking directions with the phone
You are both missing the point. Apples map app will be the platform. Third party apps on your phone will take advantage of it. A ton of devs each writing their own apps using Apple's map data, with results displayed in Apples Map app will make for far more interesting things to be written than if Apple's or Googles relatively small development teams tried to do it all.
So there won't be new 3rd party maps for every city, there will just be Apple's maps and Google's maps. Only Apples walled garden maps will be far more accessible to developer use for dynamic things than Google's supposedly open access which really only means you can plot static KML over it.
"When building Maps, we looked around and realized the best transit apps for metros, for hiking, for biking, are coming from our developers,"
Yeah, I hear there's a really good, free one called Google Maps - maybe let Tim Cook know?
Larry, is that you? And you thought Tim was going to soften on Steve's thermonuclear stance. Now we can see Tim is just as offended and has decided to cut off the oxygen supply piece by piece, app by app. All while smiling and making sure the execution is ruthlessly efficient. Tim's style may not be as publicly obvious, but it is true to the Apple core belief of make your own stuff.
Sorry, if I have to go outside the Maps app to get alternative transit date, I have to say this is a fail. I don't want to have to bounce around multiple apps trying to figure out the best way to get somewhere. A specialized activity like hiking or bike trail riding, sure. But walking and transit are integral for any urban consumer, and I shouldn't have to flick between Maps and one or more 3rd party apps (re-entering all the info multiple times!) to figure out how to get somewhere.
If the alternative (non-car) data is embeddable as layers within the Maps app, by downloading other 3rd party maps -- that might be OK for your usual locality (even then, you have to know which add-on apps to download - Caltrain, SamTrans, Muni, Bart, etc.), but it's not going to be very user friendly when visiting another city. If I go to Boston, all the transit data is right there; I shouldn't have to go to the App Store and look for Boston transit apps to add into Maps.
EDIT: (And for those saying "but including transit and biking, etc. would be way too much data for Maps!", I say "Google's been doing it for years". Once you've got the incredible complexity of maps, with all the streets [which have to be mapped as individual lanes, with every intersection detailed for appropriate access], buildings, parks, etc., it's actually very little more data to add in transit schedules!)
You have no clue as to how painfully intensive it is to keep those things current. Google maps still gives me bad directions and is horrible with the BART and Muni schedules/routes in their own stomping ground. Because of this I have a Muni app and Bart app. Currently they display on a static Google map but have to leave the app to do it. I can imagine they will soon have access to the Apple map platform and not have to do that. I also expect these apps will feel almost like plugins to the Apple map platform when all is said and done. You will see a screen wipe the external app does its job. It will hardly feel different than scrolling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff
But you see, to me that's "not very user friendly" at step one. If I fly to Boston for business, to Honolulu for vacation, etc., I don't want to have to think "OK, now that I've landed I've got to go to the App Store and see if I can find the transit layers I need..."
"Plug and play" was the mantra that made Apple successful, and I think the point that people like me are making -- respectfully -- is that Apple seems to be getting away from that -- to us the message "You just have to go to the App Store... then locate the transit collection... now find the city you need, and download the one or more apps that correspond..." is not simple, it's not the sort of "plug and play" that we're used to getting out of Cupertino.
You haven't been reading much at all. If you fly into Boston and ask for services in the map app that you don't already have, Maps will suggest the options to you. By the description given you don't have to go off to sea on a fishing expedition, it's more like getting the fish from the fishmonger right in front of you. Even Google has to download all the data before you can use it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Rather than include transit and walking directions natively in the new Maps application in iOS 6, Apple will instead highlight third-party options available on the iOS App Store.
...
This is Apple being completely (and transparently) disingenuous.
The whole "let's switch from Google Maps" thing is starting to sound like a complete f*ck up from day one. What a lot of people in the USA might not appreciate, is that about 60% of the world doesn't drive cars, so while you guys are all busy obsessing over turn by turn, Apple has removed most of the functionality that *most* of the people using the maps app (world-wide anyway) rely on.
As a pedestrian and bicyclist, streetview is supremely important.
Accurate bus information is even more important than that
Walking times and directions that are integrated with the bus routes are essential.
There is no app that I'm aware of in my city to do this for me and I sure wouldn't trust it if there was.
To just send the users searching through the crap in the app store for this is unconscionable.
Absolutely ridiculous. I hate Google with a passion and everything they stand for but at this rate I will be looking for the Google Map solution on the first day I get my new iPhone
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Bingo! We have a winner!
I suspect an enterprising developer could even provide, dare we say it, a street level view app. Although iOS 6 Maps doesn't need a street level view.
This is just a ridiculous thing to say.
First off maps *need* streetview. It's one of the most popular features the users use all the time.
Secondly, how is it that some developer is going to have the money to drive thousands of cars loaded with cameras all around the city (or every city). Streetview is impossible without some giant company footing the bill for the cars and staff to take the pictures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
Sounds to me like it'll be handled the same way Passbook is. You download the original app and it registers its data with Apple's system application.
The same will apply to Maps. I can download, say, a Metro Bus schedule application. It would register its data with the system through the Maps API and that information would be available to the system map and viewable in any application that makes use of the system's maps view.
This platform type architecture would allow almost any kind of information to be inserted into a map... Imagine downloading a Metro Zoo or national park app and it registers itself with the system map and allows the map to show points of interests.
The possibilities are endless.
The problem is that this also sounds incredibly complex. If I'm a middle-aged housewife with no computer knowledge and who doesn't even buy apps, and I just bought a phone and want to find out when the next bus is coming to the stop I'm standing at, previous to this move the phone would just tell me.
Now I have to download an app (what's that? how do I do that?), register it with the map? WTF? It's already way too complex.
The user shouldn't have to do anything but look at the map. If you have to do anything else at all it's a fail, or at least a step back in functionality from the original.
Now Google has that way of shooting themselves in the foot by making their own apps ridiculously and stupidly complex so perhaps their solution will also suck, but so far ... this solution from Apple is completely full to the brim with suck.
I'm not sure what the advantage would be. It would be like what, Mapquest?
Well, Nokia does the same thing. But they don't have a large and thriving third party navigation app market either. If you don't have one, you do it yourself.
So I could have understood it, say, two years ago, maybe three. But now it isn't really needed, except for those who simply won't pay for anything.
Apple's app store had nothing to do with Android. They were competing with Nokia, as they had it, from what I remember. But June 2008 was when the app store did open up.
But when did they add, not walking directions or traffic reporting, neither of which count for this discussion, but spoken turn by turn driving directions? That's what Nokia was giving. And shortly after Apple did open the app store, we began seeing turn by turn apps appear. Just one or two at first, but then a bunch. How many are on the Android platform? I think every major company has one for iOS.
I have this with my MotionX turn by turn app. I can choose to turn traffic data that comes TO me on or off, and I can choose to participate in giving back my location and speed data to their crowd sourced database. I do both. I would imaging that apples would be usefull over more places as it could be that more people would use app,e,s app that anyone else's, and so would give more data back. Unless we would be agreeing to give the data even though we weren't using Apple's turn by turn app. That would be ok by me. As long as this is anonymized, I don't care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Apple's app store had nothing to do with Android. They were competing with Nokia, as they had it, from what I remember. But June 2008 was when the app store did open up.
But when did they add, not walking directions or traffic reporting, neither of which count for this discussion, but spoken turn by turn driving directions? That's what Nokia was giving. And shortly after Apple did open the app store, we began seeing turn by turn apps appear. Just one or two at first, but then a bunch. How many are on the Android platform? I think every major company has one for iOS.
Mel, believe your memory of events is incorrect. Nokia introduced free spoken turn-by-turn directions for some of it's Symbian phones in January/2010, a few months after Google Maps 2.0 brought the feature to Android phones in October of 2009.
Note too that Google's connected navigation service wasn't being offered by any smartphone app provider when it was announced. Not Tomtom, Sygic, Navigon nor any other Android, Symbian, iOS or Blackberry-compatible app. It had nothing to do with iOS nav providers offering similar paid features not available to Android users. What Google brought to market wasn't available from anyone else for smartphones, period.
http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/28/google-redefines-car-gps-navigation-google-maps-navigation-android/
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Unless we would be agreeing to give the data even though we weren't using Apple's turn by turn app. That would be ok by me. As long as this is anonymized, I don't care.
Mel, do you personally consider data anonymized if it's tied to a UDID? I know what Apple calls it in their privacy policy. Just curious.
All the article says is that that Droid model, which was the first one to come with Android 2.0 was the first Android phone to come with that. It doesn't say anything else.
If the company keeps that UDID on record, along with the info, then no. But Apple has eliminated that practice for app makers, and they said that they didn't collect that info themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
All the article says is that that Droid model, which was the first one to come with Android 2.0 was the first Android phone to come with that. It doesn't say anything else.
I was posting it so you could see the features that were introduced if you were at all curious. I figured you weren't aware of all of them. As for Nokia/Navteq they were still months behind Google in offering TBT voice navigation. From Google Maps 2.0 forward it's been Nokia/Navteq chasing Google rather than the other way around.
I contacted RealPlaces and we are in the process of evaluating what we can offer on Apple iOS. Thank you very much for the suggestion! I am very excited to help this small company grow as well as provide a service that so many feel is critical to Apple iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundvision
I'm pretty sure for my city, nothing is easier than bringing up Maps and having Google tell me which bus to get on and when it leaves. Luckily I don't ride the bus much so it doesn't matter but this definitely that will be missed. I don't want to download 3rd party maps for every new city I'm instead versus just bring up Google Maps. At least Google will have a separate app so I can use their maps when needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyb0731
This is disappointing. I was always much more likely to use the walking directions with the phone
You are both missing the point. Apples map app will be the platform. Third party apps on your phone will take advantage of it. A ton of devs each writing their own apps using Apple's map data, with results displayed in Apples Map app will make for far more interesting things to be written than if Apple's or Googles relatively small development teams tried to do it all.
So there won't be new 3rd party maps for every city, there will just be Apple's maps and Google's maps. Only Apples walled garden maps will be far more accessible to developer use for dynamic things than Google's supposedly open access which really only means you can plot static KML over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redheadednomad
"When building Maps, we looked around and realized the best transit apps for metros, for hiking, for biking, are coming from our developers,"
Yeah, I hear there's a really good, free one called Google Maps - maybe let Tim Cook know?
Larry, is that you? And you thought Tim was going to soften on Steve's thermonuclear stance. Now we can see Tim is just as offended and has decided to cut off the oxygen supply piece by piece, app by app. All while smiling and making sure the execution is ruthlessly efficient. Tim's style may not be as publicly obvious, but it is true to the Apple core belief of make your own stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff
Sorry, if I have to go outside the Maps app to get alternative transit date, I have to say this is a fail. I don't want to have to bounce around multiple apps trying to figure out the best way to get somewhere. A specialized activity like hiking or bike trail riding, sure. But walking and transit are integral for any urban consumer, and I shouldn't have to flick between Maps and one or more 3rd party apps (re-entering all the info multiple times!) to figure out how to get somewhere.
If the alternative (non-car) data is embeddable as layers within the Maps app, by downloading other 3rd party maps -- that might be OK for your usual locality (even then, you have to know which add-on apps to download - Caltrain, SamTrans, Muni, Bart, etc.), but it's not going to be very user friendly when visiting another city. If I go to Boston, all the transit data is right there; I shouldn't have to go to the App Store and look for Boston transit apps to add into Maps.
EDIT: (And for those saying "but including transit and biking, etc. would be way too much data for Maps!", I say "Google's been doing it for years". Once you've got the incredible complexity of maps, with all the streets [which have to be mapped as individual lanes, with every intersection detailed for appropriate access], buildings, parks, etc., it's actually very little more data to add in transit schedules!)
You have no clue as to how painfully intensive it is to keep those things current. Google maps still gives me bad directions and is horrible with the BART and Muni schedules/routes in their own stomping ground. Because of this I have a Muni app and Bart app. Currently they display on a static Google map but have to leave the app to do it. I can imagine they will soon have access to the Apple map platform and not have to do that. I also expect these apps will feel almost like plugins to the Apple map platform when all is said and done. You will see a screen wipe the external app does its job. It will hardly feel different than scrolling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff
But you see, to me that's "not very user friendly" at step one. If I fly to Boston for business, to Honolulu for vacation, etc., I don't want to have to think "OK, now that I've landed I've got to go to the App Store and see if I can find the transit layers I need..."
"Plug and play" was the mantra that made Apple successful, and I think the point that people like me are making -- respectfully -- is that Apple seems to be getting away from that -- to us the message "You just have to go to the App Store... then locate the transit collection... now find the city you need, and download the one or more apps that correspond..." is not simple, it's not the sort of "plug and play" that we're used to getting out of Cupertino.
You haven't been reading much at all. If you fly into Boston and ask for services in the map app that you don't already have, Maps will suggest the options to you. By the description given you don't have to go off to sea on a fishing expedition, it's more like getting the fish from the fishmonger right in front of you. Even Google has to download all the data before you can use it.
deleted via consolidation