Then people would be on here bitching about how Google is trying to get their info.
Google Fiber is a simple effort at protecting net neutrality. That's it. It's a knife to Comcast and TWC throats. If they start insisting on prioritizing traffic, Google can expand Fiber to multi-year nationwide roll-out and crush them. That said, it's not easy for Google to commit to a national roll-out costing hundreds of billions of dollars.
You are a regular laugh riot today: "Google Fiber is a simple effort at protecting net neutrality." Good one!
Google Fiber is about protecting Google's interests and has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. Google's already shown the other side of their face when they conspired with Verizon to kill off the entire concept of net neutrality. To Google, net neutrality means nothing but, "Do whatever you want to everyone else, but don't **** with our traffic."
as a global moderator, is that the official appleinsider position?
<strong>BTW, there are at least two global moderators... </strong>. and while they read all the comments, i don't think/believe they are the "voice" of the site.
uhhhh, the publisher is???...
the posters are the voice of the site LOL, which Bingo!, is why they have "Global Moderators"
Transit information?
The only "transit information" I need is when I feel like putting my key in the ignition and pulling out onto the road.
For those poor unfortunates who dont have a car, transit information is available through a quick Bing of transit company's website for the timetables.
That is a ridiculous position to take. Millions of people around the planet use public transit regularly - and there are probably more who would find their life to be easier and less expensive if they did. Just a few examples:
- People who live in a large city. Most NYC residents, for example, probably never need a car unless they're traveling out of town - and renting one for the trip would be far less expensive than owning one just for your annual trek to Grandma's.
- Tourists and travelers. When I go to a major city on vacation, I most commonly leave the car at the hotel (or skip the car entirely and take a taxi from the airport to the hotel) and then use mass transit to get around. It's easier and far less expensive.
- Environmentally conscious people. Regardless of your views on global warming, there are plenty of good reasons to reduce your energy usage - cost, trade balance issues (which cost everyone billions of dollars), international security issues, health costs (a large percentage of asthma is caused by pollution), and so on.
- Traffic. I used to live in the Philadelphia area. It took me 45 minutes to an hour to get to work by car and 30 minutes by train. Plus, I could get work done or read on the train, so I gained an hour and a half to two hours of productive time every day.
Any time I've lived somewhere that trains were available, I used them regularly - because I saved a ton of money and got to where I was going a lot more quickly.
Given that, I'd like to see Apple include transit information with iOS (I don't care if it's in Maps or a separate app).
Street view? Meh. I have GPS on my phone so I don't need to see the buildings to know where I am.
I'm sorry, but have you noticed that Apple has baked in Yelp services in their new maps app? Why do you need GOOGLE to provide a "street view" when the Yelp business pages have numerous photos of the business (inside and outside) that would give you the exact same information (and likely even more info) than what Street View offered? Your arguments make no sense at all...other than just to bitch about a lost feature. I live in a big city and I've owned an iPhone for years now. I've used Street View about 5 times total. I'd hardly call that a key feature that they've now removed. Apple has greatly improved on "street view" by implementing Yelp's services.
Maybe you Google lovers out there should stick with Android and the understanding that EVERY SINGLE THING that Google does as a business is half-assed. It's absolutely no surprise to me that Apple's BETA 3D maps are far superior to Google's FINAL product. Just another example of Google rushing out a product that offers a poor user experience.
Maybe you Google lovers out there should stick with Android and the understanding that EVERY SINGLE THING that Google does as a business is half-assed. It's absolutely no surprise to me that Apple's BETA 3D maps are far superior to Google's FINAL product. Just another example of Google rushing out a product that offers a poor user experience.
Well, it does help to remember that Google Earth (and Google everything else) isn't really a product, per se, since its users aren't Google's customers. It would be more accurate to call Googleware "bait".
That would be ideal, everyone focussing on their core competency and doing it very well, instead of what we have today, software companies like Google and Microsoft lusting after Apple's fat hardware margins and spending billions going nowhere real fast.
Google missed on a great opportunity by being devious and antagonistic - now there's no turning back, however...
Well, it does help to remember that Google Earth (and Google everything else) isn't really a product, per se, since its users aren't Google's customers. It would be more accurate to call Googleware "bait".
Your solution to a lack of easily accessible transit information is to drive everywhere? No concerns about global warming? No concerns about traffic congestion in your community? No concerns about cost of gasoline? No concerns about weight gain (driving and weight gain have proven and direct correlations)?
I'm starting to feel more grateful for being Canadian when I read crap like this. Even Members of Parliament and ministers take the bus or walk, here in Ottawa. No public servant with less than 17 years of service gets a parking pass in the city centre. I'm sure Europe is even stricter.
And Bing still sucks outside the USA. And looking up and navigating a transit systems website is no way near as intuitive or convenient as a native solution on a maps app built into the phone. Are you so brainwashed that you actually support a horrendous user experience if it's not Apple?
Nope, I use LPG in my car the same as a bus does, my six cylinder Ford uses less petrol (gasoline) than a prius, actually about the same as a bicycle.
In the olden days we didn't even have GPS yet still managed somehow.
The only "transit information" I need is when I feel like putting my key in the ignition and pulling out onto the road.
For those poor unfortunates who dont have a car, transit information is available through a quick Bing of transit company's website for the timetables.
For those who travel frequently like myself, this has always been a very handy feature. When visiting major metropolitan area, public transportation is often even more convenient than driving a rental car.
So what they are saying is that on an iPad.... cough... or an iPhone ... cough cough... the iMappyThing is better.... big shocker.... since they also dumb down the competition's apps when it comes to browsers and searches pertaining to which device is best are pre-programmed in.
Look, you want honest... my Evo LTE has maps that look real (and a damn sight better than those iPad images)... and those iMappyThing images look too crisp. People seem to forget that the human eye doesn't see things that way. They look fake and generated because of it. It's part of the reason people like Apple I guess. The products screen looks better than the real world.
Some people don't know how time-lines work, and like to illogically call others idiots.
So what they are saying is that on an iPad.... cough... or an iPhone ... cough cough... the iMappyThing is better.... big shocker...
Except your premise is completely wrong.
…since they also dumb down the competition's apps when it comes to browsers…
There's a security reason for that.
and searches pertaining to which device is best are pre-programmed in.
lol, no. Otherwise proof?
Look, you want honest... my Evo LTE has maps that look real (and a damn sight better than those iPad images)...
Screenshots, please?
…and those iMappyThing images look too crisp.
Reality certainly isn't in focus or anything.
People seem to forget that the human eye doesn't see things that way.
Accurately, you mean? I recon it does…
They look fake and generated because of it. It's part of the reason people like Apple I guess. The products screen looks better than the real world.
I'd love to know how they could possibly make anything look better than the real world. Are they going through and removing all the blemishes from each brick? Are they filling in potholes? Erasing illicit crack deals in back alleyways?
Some people don't know how time-lines work, and like to illogically call others idiots.
Feel free to keep rambling; we'll just ignore you. Otherwise could you explain what you're referencing here?
So there's no street view (which, yes, IS very useful), and judging by the pre-release imagery at least, the bread-and-butter 2D maps are nowhere near as detailed as the Google versions.
But hey, who actually needs to navigate anywhere when we can have a gimmicky 3D feature?
I like that Apple's apparently scrubbed the cars from the aerial view, so that you can see the lanes and lane markings. That makes the images more useful than the Google images with random cars everywhere.
It also makes the Apple images look a lot cleaner too (if a bit post-zombie-apocalyse...)
That's why you'll never seen street view in apple's maps.
Privacy concerns are likely the bigger reason
Too bad, so sad. If the people in some city or country don't want me seeing their streets in Street View, then I don't feel particularly welcome to visit there IRL. Wouldn't want to step on anyone's privacy rights by happening to drive or walk down their street. The European country I most wanted to see on Street View, Germany, has been the most vehement against it; while they haven't actually banned it, only a few areas in major cities were photographed, and that was many years ago. And besides, more and more gets blurred as time goes on. You can be one tenant in a large apartment building, and demand that it be blurred for your "privacy", and there's no need to substantiate damages.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
1) Nonsense. Only fanboys believe that.
Mapquest fanboys? Funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
Then people would be on here bitching about how Google is trying to get their info.
Google Fiber is a simple effort at protecting net neutrality. That's it. It's a knife to Comcast and TWC throats. If they start insisting on prioritizing traffic, Google can expand Fiber to multi-year nationwide roll-out and crush them. That said, it's not easy for Google to commit to a national roll-out costing hundreds of billions of dollars.
You are a regular laugh riot today: "Google Fiber is a simple effort at protecting net neutrality." Good one!
Google Fiber is about protecting Google's interests and has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. Google's already shown the other side of their face when they conspired with Verizon to kill off the entire concept of net neutrality. To Google, net neutrality means nothing but, "Do whatever you want to everyone else, but don't **** with our traffic."
<strong>BTW, there are at least two global moderators... </strong>. and while they read all the comments, i don't think/believe they are the "voice" of the site.
uhhhh, the publisher is???...
the posters are the voice of the site LOL, which Bingo!, is why they have "Global Moderators"
Originally Posted by haar
BTW, there are at least two global moderators... . and while they read all the comments, i don't think/believe they are the "voice" of the site.
Let's see… there's me, JeffDM, Marvin, melgross, and there are even more mods that don't post here anymore. And then there's lundy on the admin end.
You're right; we don't make up site policy, but the admins/mods implement changes to how the forum's run and what's considered acceptable.
That is a ridiculous position to take. Millions of people around the planet use public transit regularly - and there are probably more who would find their life to be easier and less expensive if they did. Just a few examples:
- People who live in a large city. Most NYC residents, for example, probably never need a car unless they're traveling out of town - and renting one for the trip would be far less expensive than owning one just for your annual trek to Grandma's.
- Tourists and travelers. When I go to a major city on vacation, I most commonly leave the car at the hotel (or skip the car entirely and take a taxi from the airport to the hotel) and then use mass transit to get around. It's easier and far less expensive.
- Environmentally conscious people. Regardless of your views on global warming, there are plenty of good reasons to reduce your energy usage - cost, trade balance issues (which cost everyone billions of dollars), international security issues, health costs (a large percentage of asthma is caused by pollution), and so on.
- Traffic. I used to live in the Philadelphia area. It took me 45 minutes to an hour to get to work by car and 30 minutes by train. Plus, I could get work done or read on the train, so I gained an hour and a half to two hours of productive time every day.
Any time I've lived somewhere that trains were available, I used them regularly - because I saved a ton of money and got to where I was going a lot more quickly.
Given that, I'd like to see Apple include transit information with iOS (I don't care if it's in Maps or a separate app).
Street view? Meh. I have GPS on my phone so I don't need to see the buildings to know where I am.
I'm sorry, but have you noticed that Apple has baked in Yelp services in their new maps app? Why do you need GOOGLE to provide a "street view" when the Yelp business pages have numerous photos of the business (inside and outside) that would give you the exact same information (and likely even more info) than what Street View offered? Your arguments make no sense at all...other than just to bitch about a lost feature. I live in a big city and I've owned an iPhone for years now. I've used Street View about 5 times total. I'd hardly call that a key feature that they've now removed. Apple has greatly improved on "street view" by implementing Yelp's services.
Maybe you Google lovers out there should stick with Android and the understanding that EVERY SINGLE THING that Google does as a business is half-assed. It's absolutely no surprise to me that Apple's BETA 3D maps are far superior to Google's FINAL product. Just another example of Google rushing out a product that offers a poor user experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattwylde
Maybe you Google lovers out there should stick with Android and the understanding that EVERY SINGLE THING that Google does as a business is half-assed. It's absolutely no surprise to me that Apple's BETA 3D maps are far superior to Google's FINAL product. Just another example of Google rushing out a product that offers a poor user experience.
Well, it does help to remember that Google Earth (and Google everything else) isn't really a product, per se, since its users aren't Google's customers. It would be more accurate to call Googleware "bait".
Hahaha! Excellent remark! And you supplied a great picture whilst you could've given me the /s tag. Darn, I need to Americanize myself more!
Quote:
Originally Posted by iansilv
OK everyone listen! I have a perfect solution to all this maps bickering!
Google just leaves maps alone and FOCUSES ON GOOGLE FIBER AND PUTTING IT EVERYWHERE!
Apple- release your maps, then focus on making the new iPhone!
Solved!
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }That would be ideal, everyone focussing on their core competency and doing it very well, instead of what we have today, software companies like Google and Microsoft lusting after Apple's fat hardware margins and spending billions going nowhere real fast.
Google missed on a great opportunity by being devious and antagonistic - now there's no turning back, however...
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu
These new flyover modes will really come into their own once I get a jet pack.
As a land dweller however, I use street view very often, and so any mapping app without it is virtually useless to me.
How did you make it this far?
Through the days of street directories, signs and asking directions?
It will be interesting to see how in future people will be unable to think for themselves and need pictures to show them where they are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Well, it does help to remember that Google Earth (and Google everything else) isn't really a product, per se, since its users aren't Google's customers. It would be more accurate to call Googleware "bait".
Honeypot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
You can't be serious.
Your solution to a lack of easily accessible transit information is to drive everywhere? No concerns about global warming? No concerns about traffic congestion in your community? No concerns about cost of gasoline? No concerns about weight gain (driving and weight gain have proven and direct correlations)?
I'm starting to feel more grateful for being Canadian when I read crap like this. Even Members of Parliament and ministers take the bus or walk, here in Ottawa. No public servant with less than 17 years of service gets a parking pass in the city centre. I'm sure Europe is even stricter.
And Bing still sucks outside the USA. And looking up and navigating a transit systems website is no way near as intuitive or convenient as a native solution on a maps app built into the phone. Are you so brainwashed that you actually support a horrendous user experience if it's not Apple?
Nope, I use LPG in my car the same as a bus does, my six cylinder Ford uses less petrol (gasoline) than a prius, actually about the same as a bicycle.
In the olden days we didn't even have GPS yet still managed somehow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Transit information?
The only "transit information" I need is when I feel like putting my key in the ignition and pulling out onto the road.
For those poor unfortunates who dont have a car, transit information is available through a quick Bing of transit company's website for the timetables.
For those who travel frequently like myself, this has always been a very handy feature. When visiting major metropolitan area, public transportation is often even more convenient than driving a rental car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
How did you make it this far?
Through the days of street directories, signs and asking directions?
It will be interesting to see how in future people will be unable to think for themselves and need pictures to show them where they are.
I just got lost.
Dark times they were.
So what they are saying is that on an iPad.... cough... or an iPhone ... cough cough... the iMappyThing is better.... big shocker.... since they also dumb down the competition's apps when it comes to browsers and searches pertaining to which device is best are pre-programmed in.
Look, you want honest... my Evo LTE has maps that look real (and a damn sight better than those iPad images)... and those iMappyThing images look too crisp. People seem to forget that the human eye doesn't see things that way. They look fake and generated because of it. It's part of the reason people like Apple I guess. The products screen looks better than the real world.
Some people don't know how time-lines work, and like to illogically call others idiots.
Originally Posted by dgolightly519
So what they are saying is that on an iPad.... cough... or an iPhone ... cough cough... the iMappyThing is better.... big shocker...
Except your premise is completely wrong.
…since they also dumb down the competition's apps when it comes to browsers…
There's a security reason for that.
and searches pertaining to which device is best are pre-programmed in.
lol, no. Otherwise proof?
Look, you want honest... my Evo LTE has maps that look real (and a damn sight better than those iPad images)...
Screenshots, please?
…and those iMappyThing images look too crisp.
Reality certainly isn't in focus or anything.
People seem to forget that the human eye doesn't see things that way.
Accurately, you mean? I recon it does…
They look fake and generated because of it. It's part of the reason people like Apple I guess. The products screen looks better than the real world.
I'd love to know how they could possibly make anything look better than the real world. Are they going through and removing all the blemishes from each brick? Are they filling in potholes? Erasing illicit crack deals in back alleyways?
Some people don't know how time-lines work, and like to illogically call others idiots.
Feel free to keep rambling; we'll just ignore you. Otherwise could you explain what you're referencing here?
So there's no street view (which, yes, IS very useful), and judging by the pre-release imagery at least, the bread-and-butter 2D maps are nowhere near as detailed as the Google versions.
But hey, who actually needs to navigate anywhere when we can have a gimmicky 3D feature?
I like that Apple's apparently scrubbed the cars from the aerial view, so that you can see the lanes and lane markings. That makes the images more useful than the Google images with random cars everywhere.
It also makes the Apple images look a lot cleaner too (if a bit post-zombie-apocalyse...)
Privacy concerns are likely the bigger reason
Too bad, so sad. If the people in some city or country don't want me seeing their streets in Street View, then I don't feel particularly welcome to visit there IRL. Wouldn't want to step on anyone's privacy rights by happening to drive or walk down their street. The European country I most wanted to see on Street View, Germany, has been the most vehement against it; while they haven't actually banned it, only a few areas in major cities were photographed, and that was many years ago. And besides, more and more gets blurred as time goes on. You can be one tenant in a large apartment building, and demand that it be blurred for your "privacy", and there's no need to substantiate damages.
…there’s no need to substantiate damages.
Right. Because it’s a matter of privacy. What don’t you get about this?