There could be a vacuum for Maps developers. Judging by the dates of these job postings and Apple having the Maps dev team on lockdown, they are probably taking all the help they can get. This was a HUGE initiative in a short amount of time. It will work out in the end, but in the meantime need to take this stuff with the grain of salt.
Personally I'm sticking with 5.1 for a bit on my phone, but going to iOS 6 on my iPad immediately.
There could be a vacuum for Maps developers. Judging by the dates of these job postings and Apple having the Maps dev team on lockdown, they are probably taking all the help they can get. This was a HUGE initiative in a short amount of time. It will work out in the end, but in the meantime need to take this stuff with the grain of salt.
Personally I'm sticking with 5.1 for a bit on my phone, but going to iOS 6 on my iPad immediately.
So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?
There are several distinct functions within the maps app which can't all be generalized together as better or worse than Google. People use the app for different purposes. I use it for two main features. One, transit directions and schedules which we all know is missing. Two, for aerial views as I'm searching for land to buy. This feature is one that I find most disappointing because it has nothing to do with hiring more developers or getting data sorted. It is just plain and simple a matter of dollars. Apple did not spend the money on licensing high quality current imagery. No amount of work will fix this, only money, and they have plenty. They just decided to not buy the good stuff and instead patched together images form different sources and did some fake colorizing and blending. In my opinion it was a wasted effort.
The anomalies in the 3D rendering are indicative of the overall approach they have taken. They tried to program their way out of having to spend money. You cannot duplicate thousands of camera vehicles on the road for several years with a few thousand lines lines of code. You cannot replace thousands of hours of aircraft photography with some 3D generated models. Their bet did not pan out. This entire line of thinking needs to be rethought. They don't need more engineers they need boots on the ground and planes in the air.
So I finally cleared some space on the iPhone 4 and upgraded to iOS 6. I wanted to play with it before my 5 arrives in a week or so, and compare the hardware with the same OS (informally) .
In any case, I've had a different experience than many international users, and even many domestic users (U.S.). In my limited experience playing around with it:
Pros:
Faster, more responsive than Google map app.
Better map display, clearer road signs, etc.
Better satellite resolution..by far.
More recent sat images (I live in a newer neighborhood, so this is obvious right away)
Better turn-by-turn display
Cons:
Traffic appears to only display incidents...not much beyond that.
Location accuracy is a bit jumpy and broad, especially with Wi-Fi off.
GREAT NEWS ! But why did they wait for the OS to come out? Didn't they realize it was bad by themselves? Is this a sign that they are too close-minded?
The picture used as an example here shows what is actually the smallest problem with maps, and this kind of artifact actually doesn't bother me at all (I don't care if I don't see under a bridge on a highway). IMO flyover is almost perfect, the next versions will load faster and be more detailed, so I'm not worried by that. The biggest problem are just the basic maps and the search engine.
Great news?!! Are you insane? Why wasn't this done years ago? For what we're paying, we're getting an incomplete product. Jobs would never have let this happen. This is pure unadulterated bs.
Jobs would never have let this happen. This is pure unadulterated bs.
Actually they are most likely acting on one of Jobs last directives. Get rid of Google on iOS whatever the cost. Apple is taking some hits on this and probably not handling it as elegantly as they usually do, but this is entirely a Jobs approved mission.
So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?
I can't speak for the entire planet but it's significantly worse in the UK. That's fact not opinion. It's missing major train stations, the names of bars appear on the map before train station names as you zoom in, a lot of maps are black and white, a lot of maps are obscured by clouds. Even Google Maps v1.0 seven years ago didn't have a lot of these problems.
It's really basic stuff that could have been sorted by hiring an intern in London for a couple of months prior to release. I hope that Apple builds up a network of 'scouts' around the world to fix these issues and keep Apple up-to-date with local information.
Dick you dont know my qualifications, trust me Scott Forstall must be sacked. His reputation is shot and he is the laughing stock of the industry.
I know your qualifications. You started out your career here at AI by suggesting that Apple buy Facebook, and touting Mark Zuckerburg as the next Steve Jobs.
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, the new maps is bs in regards to content. I don't say this to hate on Apple, but when a company does something bad, I want them to know about it, otherwise they have no motivation to improve. They should've allowed for a year where the native google apps stuck around, sans turn by turn, along side the apple maps and NEXT year (iOS7), when apple maps would have the data it needs, then it would fly solo. This however was just plain dumb, and I hope that it is a reflection of conditions outside of their control (contract options with google) and not a sign of myopic, dim-witted decision making on the part of Apple execs. That said, I hope they don't just improve to fix bugs. I hope they swing for the fences and have it offer all the data/features (maybe not street view) that Google offers and more but in a faster, more user friendly iteration. Push the envelope guys... you've got the cash. On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over. I love your OS X, but I refuse to be forced into paying extortionist prices for ram and SSD (which are inferior)... I'll pay a premium for the apple computer but I want the freedom to extend it's life with basic upgrades later. Your computers are really nice but they aren't precious jewels that your users dare not open... and that's coming from a dedicated apple fan.
So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?
There are several distinct functions within the maps app which can't all be generalized together as better or worse than Google. People use the app for different purposes. I use it for two main features. One, transit directions and schedules which we all know is missing. Two, for aerial views as I'm searching for land to buy. This feature is one that I find most disappointing because it has nothing to do with hiring more developers or getting data sorted. It is just plain and simple a matter of dollars. Apple did not spend the money on licensing high quality current imagery. No amount of work will fix this, only money, and they have plenty. They just decided to not buy the good stuff and instead patched together images form different sources and did some fake colorizing and blending. In my opinion it was a wasted effort.
The anomalies in the 3D rendering are indicative of the overall approach they have taken. They tried to program their way out of having to spend money. You cannot duplicate thousands of camera vehicles on the road for several years with a few thousand lines lines of code. You cannot replace thousands of hours of aircraft photography with some 3D generated models. Their bet did not pan out. This entire line of thinking needs to be rethought. They don't need more engineers they need boots on the ground and planes in the air.
Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?
I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.
As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.
The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.
THIRD screw-up in a row. Let's not forget the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. Unlike that time, it will take Apple a long time to fix Maps.
Yeah, you people sure do love to lie, don't you?
So I can laugh at it, what was the second one?
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
You are delusional.
Calling that out specifically… hmm…
Originally Posted by msalganik
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way…
On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over.
I noticed that Yahoo had an article on the new iPhone 5 and iOS 6 and its maps app. I noticed in that Yahoo article that a person posted the battery charge was significantly less on their iPhone since they upgraded to iOS6 from 5.1.1 on their iPhone 4s. I noticed that very same problem on my iPhone 4s. My battery used to last two days. Now it runs low in 8 hours on the same usage habits.
The map app seems to run allot slower and doesn't load as well as the old one in iOS 5.1.1. Didn't Apple foresee this? Really didn't they test this out without major issues arising.
In Steve JObs day he would probably go to the department that was responsible and cuss them out or fire them all.
Oh, please stop with the 'if Steve were still alive' crap. You even remember what OS X was like on its first release?
Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?
I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.
As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.
The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.
TomTom offers vector maps to it's licensees like Apple as does OpenStreetMaps. Competing map platforms from Nokia/Navteq and Google are also natively vector. That Google maps on iOS have been restricted to bitmapped images is an anomaly, perhaps due to Apple restrictions... or perhaps not.
Anyway as Tomtom has been quick to point out (once the complaints started), while they stand behind the quality of the map data they've sold to Apple, it's Apple's job to figure out how to properly use it as they didn't buy any support or development to go along with it. Of course TomTom has extended an offer to Apple to come into their house and fix things for them. I don't expect Apple to take them up on the offer, at least publicly, and I personally doubt they have the resources to take the project on anyway. TT has it's own issues to deal with.
This morning was the first time I used voice-assisted, turn-by-turn GPS directions ever, on any device, because it was free, easy, and present on my iPhone.
Me wanting to be able to upgrade RAM and HDD on my own is not getting? Those are basics and Apple has had it on most of their computers for a while. Heck i just bought a new computer from them that still offers that option! I don't mind the other stuff being non-upgradable, and I do like Apples approach for hardware/software integration.. its the whole reason I own an Apple and not a PC. The decision to prevent RAM and HDD upgrades however stinks of profiteering and not any real design agenda. The whole "you don't get it" line just makes Apple users look like assholes, so for the sake of those of us (and I believe it to be the majority of Apple users) who like the company but aren't afraid to criticize once in a while, please keep your snobbish attitude to yourself. A company needs feedback in order to keep providing customers with what they want. Yes, Apple also redefines the rules sometimes and gives people something they didn't even know they wanted... that great, but the upgradability of HDD and RAM is NOT one of those instances.
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, ..
Translation:
Quote:
Well I am a troll... I'm going to tell you I own a bunch of Apple products to "prove" that I'm not an Apple-hating troll. That out of the way, I'm going to spew a bunch of crap about how much Apple sucks and how evil they are. And, I'll repeat that I'm really a big Apple fan, even though the rest of my post talks about how much I hate them, because you won't be able to criticize me if I'm a big Apple fan.
Google first announced plans to begin monetizing Google Maps nearly a year ago, including a requirement that any new services forward display advertising in Google Maps along to their end users, so Google could start generating advertising revenue from the service. The hammer truly dropped in October 2011, when Google finally revealed pricing for Google Maps services. Lightweight usage was still free — subject to terms of service, of course. However, significant load volumes would begin to incur charges: basically, services and applications that generated more 25,000 map loads per day would be charged $40 to $10 for every additional 1,000 map loads.
<snip>
What will the future bring? It’s safe to say that Google is going to continue to push to monetize Google Maps and bank on the substantial investment it has made to develop the service. That’s probably not going to mean higher fees for apps and services to use Google Maps; however, it’s more likely that Google will continue to tweak terms of service so users of Google Maps will increasingly have to accept advertising from Google pushed along with Google Map content.
Seems like the only people who don't worry about Google monetizing Google Maps by increasing advertising and mining their personal information for marketing purposes are the trolls that are getting paid by Google and Android manufacturers to jump online and raise a ruckus.
<span style="background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">Google first announced plans to begin monetizing Google Maps </span>
<a href="http://googlegeodevelopers.blogspot.com/2011/04/updates-to-google-maps-apigoogle-earth.html" style="background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline;color:rgb(96,120,144);" target="_blank">nearly a year ago</a>
<span style="background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">, including a requirement that any new services forward display advertising in Google Maps along to their end users, so Google could start generating advertising revenue from the service. The hammer truly dropped in October 2011, when Google finally revealed pricing for Google Maps services. Lightweight usage was still free — subject to terms of service, of course. However, significant load volumes would begin to </span>
<a href="http://code.google.com/apis/maps/faq.html#usage_pricing" style="background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline;color:rgb(96,120,144);" target="_blank">incur charges</a>
<span style="background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">: basically, services and applications that generated more 25,000 map loads per day would be charged $40 to $10 for every additional 1,000 map loads.</span>
<p style="border:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">What will the future bring? It’s safe to say that Google is going to continue to push to monetize Google Maps and bank on the substantial investment it has made to develop the service. That’s probably <em style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background-color:transparent;">not</em>
going to mean higher fees for apps and services to use Google Maps; however, it’s more likely that Google will continue to tweak terms of service so users of Google Maps will increasingly have to accept advertising from Google pushed along with Google Map content.</p>
<span style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">Read more: <a href="http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/why-are-companies-defecting-from-google-maps/#ixzz277U5Xghq" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,51,153);" target="_blank">http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/why-are-companies-defecting-from-google-maps/#ixzz277U5Xghq</a>;
</span>
<span style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background-color:transparent;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:15px;">Seems like the only people who don't worry about Google monetizing Google Maps by increasing advertising and mining their personal information for marketing purposes are the trolls that are getting paid by Google and Android manufacturers to jump online and raise a ruckus.</span>
Well this certainly is a fiasco! First they lose Google search as the default in the Safari browser. Then they lose the YouTube app on iOS 6. Finally, they lose the maps app on iOS 6. Everyone knows that Google gets most of its mobile income from Apple devices.
This is all due to the greed of Google and Larry Page. Larry's reputation is shot and he should be fired immediately.
Comments
Personally I'm sticking with 5.1 for a bit on my phone, but going to iOS 6 on my iPad immediately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647
There could be a vacuum for Maps developers. Judging by the dates of these job postings and Apple having the Maps dev team on lockdown, they are probably taking all the help they can get. This was a HUGE initiative in a short amount of time. It will work out in the end, but in the meantime need to take this stuff with the grain of salt.
Personally I'm sticking with 5.1 for a bit on my phone, but going to iOS 6 on my iPad immediately.
Sounds like a reasonable option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?
There are several distinct functions within the maps app which can't all be generalized together as better or worse than Google. People use the app for different purposes. I use it for two main features. One, transit directions and schedules which we all know is missing. Two, for aerial views as I'm searching for land to buy. This feature is one that I find most disappointing because it has nothing to do with hiring more developers or getting data sorted. It is just plain and simple a matter of dollars. Apple did not spend the money on licensing high quality current imagery. No amount of work will fix this, only money, and they have plenty. They just decided to not buy the good stuff and instead patched together images form different sources and did some fake colorizing and blending. In my opinion it was a wasted effort.
The anomalies in the 3D rendering are indicative of the overall approach they have taken. They tried to program their way out of having to spend money. You cannot duplicate thousands of camera vehicles on the road for several years with a few thousand lines lines of code. You cannot replace thousands of hours of aircraft photography with some 3D generated models. Their bet did not pan out. This entire line of thinking needs to be rethought. They don't need more engineers they need boots on the ground and planes in the air.
So I finally cleared some space on the iPhone 4 and upgraded to iOS 6. I wanted to play with it before my 5 arrives in a week or so, and compare the hardware with the same OS (informally) .
In any case, I've had a different experience than many international users, and even many domestic users (U.S.). In my limited experience playing around with it:
Pros:
Faster, more responsive than Google map app.
Better map display, clearer road signs, etc.
Better satellite resolution..by far.
More recent sat images (I live in a newer neighborhood, so this is obvious right away)
Better turn-by-turn display
Cons:
Traffic appears to only display incidents...not much beyond that.
Location accuracy is a bit jumpy and broad, especially with Wi-Fi off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
GREAT NEWS ! But why did they wait for the OS to come out? Didn't they realize it was bad by themselves? Is this a sign that they are too close-minded?
The picture used as an example here shows what is actually the smallest problem with maps, and this kind of artifact actually doesn't bother me at all (I don't care if I don't see under a bridge on a highway). IMO flyover is almost perfect, the next versions will load faster and be more detailed, so I'm not worried by that. The biggest problem are just the basic maps and the search engine.
Great news?!! Are you insane? Why wasn't this done years ago? For what we're paying, we're getting an incomplete product. Jobs would never have let this happen. This is pure unadulterated bs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yu119995
Jobs would never have let this happen. This is pure unadulterated bs.
Actually they are most likely acting on one of Jobs last directives. Get rid of Google on iOS whatever the cost. Apple is taking some hits on this and probably not handling it as elegantly as they usually do, but this is entirely a Jobs approved mission.
More like Blackintosh, I'd say. This one's posts are more blunt-force stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So where's the evidence that Apple's maps is significantly worse than Google's?
I can't speak for the entire planet but it's significantly worse in the UK. That's fact not opinion. It's missing major train stations, the names of bars appear on the map before train station names as you zoom in, a lot of maps are black and white, a lot of maps are obscured by clouds. Even Google Maps v1.0 seven years ago didn't have a lot of these problems.
It's really basic stuff that could have been sorted by hiring an intern in London for a couple of months prior to release. I hope that Apple builds up a network of 'scouts' around the world to fix these issues and keep Apple up-to-date with local information.
I know your qualifications. You started out your career here at AI by suggesting that Apple buy Facebook, and touting Mark Zuckerburg as the next Steve Jobs.
Carry on, we're not listening.
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, the new maps is bs in regards to content. I don't say this to hate on Apple, but when a company does something bad, I want them to know about it, otherwise they have no motivation to improve. They should've allowed for a year where the native google apps stuck around, sans turn by turn, along side the apple maps and NEXT year (iOS7), when apple maps would have the data it needs, then it would fly solo. This however was just plain dumb, and I hope that it is a reflection of conditions outside of their control (contract options with google) and not a sign of myopic, dim-witted decision making on the part of Apple execs. That said, I hope they don't just improve to fix bugs. I hope they swing for the fences and have it offer all the data/features (maybe not street view) that Google offers and more but in a faster, more user friendly iteration. Push the envelope guys... you've got the cash. On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over. I love your OS X, but I refuse to be forced into paying extortionist prices for ram and SSD (which are inferior)... I'll pay a premium for the apple computer but I want the freedom to extend it's life with basic upgrades later. Your computers are really nice but they aren't precious jewels that your users dare not open... and that's coming from a dedicated apple fan.
Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?
I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.
As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.
The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.
Originally Posted by London Dude
THIRD screw-up in a row. Let's not forget the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. Unlike that time, it will take Apple a long time to fix Maps.
Yeah, you people sure do love to lie, don't you?
So I can laugh at it, what was the second one?
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
You are delusional.
Calling that out specifically… hmm…
Originally Posted by msalganik
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way…
On a side note, cut the @#$! with soldering in components like you did on your MPB. Design decisions like that kept me from spending more money of the retina macbook pro and getting the "old" unibody version instead. If you discontinue the unibodies and don't change this whole soldering deal with the retinas, I'm afraid my love affair with the mac will be over.
Better just go buy a PC now. You don't get it.
Oh, please stop with the 'if Steve were still alive' crap. You even remember what OS X was like on its first release?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Could you post some images... Or better yet, some general locations where the images are inferior?
I have the iOS 5 maps on an iPad 1 and I want to compare it with iOS 6 on an iPad 2 and iPad 3.
As I responded earlier to one of your posts, it is not like Apple to go cheap on something like this – especially after MobileMe.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the new maps app uses vector graphics instead of raster graphics.
The new maps app doesn't appear to slow down as much as the old maps app when displaying overhead images.
TomTom offers vector maps to it's licensees like Apple as does OpenStreetMaps. Competing map platforms from Nokia/Navteq and Google are also natively vector. That Google maps on iOS have been restricted to bitmapped images is an anomaly, perhaps due to Apple restrictions... or perhaps not.
Anyway as Tomtom has been quick to point out (once the complaints started), while they stand behind the quality of the map data they've sold to Apple, it's Apple's job to figure out how to properly use it as they didn't buy any support or development to go along with it. Of course TomTom has extended an offer to Apple to come into their house and fix things for them. I don't expect Apple to take them up on the offer, at least publicly, and I personally doubt they have the resources to take the project on anyway. TT has it's own issues to deal with.
This morning was the first time I used voice-assisted, turn-by-turn GPS directions ever, on any device, because it was free, easy, and present on my iPhone.
Quote:
"Better just go buy a PC now. You don't get it."
Me wanting to be able to upgrade RAM and HDD on my own is not getting? Those are basics and Apple has had it on most of their computers for a while. Heck i just bought a new computer from them that still offers that option! I don't mind the other stuff being non-upgradable, and I do like Apples approach for hardware/software integration.. its the whole reason I own an Apple and not a PC. The decision to prevent RAM and HDD upgrades however stinks of profiteering and not any real design agenda. The whole "you don't get it" line just makes Apple users look like assholes, so for the sake of those of us (and I believe it to be the majority of Apple users) who like the company but aren't afraid to criticize once in a while, please keep your snobbish attitude to yourself. A company needs feedback in order to keep providing customers with what they want. Yes, Apple also redefines the rules sometimes and gives people something they didn't even know they wanted... that great, but the upgradability of HDD and RAM is NOT one of those instances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by msalganik
Well I am an apple fan... just got a new macbook pro, I've got an iPhone 4S and am planing on getting the iPad mini if it materializes. That out of the way, ..
Translation:
Quote:
Well I am a troll... I'm going to tell you I own a bunch of Apple products to "prove" that I'm not an Apple-hating troll. That out of the way, I'm going to spew a bunch of crap about how much Apple sucks and how evil they are. And, I'll repeat that I'm really a big Apple fan, even though the rest of my post talks about how much I hate them, because you won't be able to criticize me if I'm a big Apple fan.
Originally Posted by msalganik
…stinks of profiteering and not any real design agenda.
And this proves it.
Google first announced plans to begin monetizing Google Maps nearly a year ago, including a requirement that any new services forward display advertising in Google Maps along to their end users, so Google could start generating advertising revenue from the service. The hammer truly dropped in October 2011, when Google finally revealed pricing for Google Maps services. Lightweight usage was still free — subject to terms of service, of course. However, significant load volumes would begin to incur charges: basically, services and applications that generated more 25,000 map loads per day would be charged $40 to $10 for every additional 1,000 map loads.
<snip>
What will the future bring? It’s safe to say that Google is going to continue to push to monetize Google Maps and bank on the substantial investment it has made to develop the service. That’s probably not going to mean higher fees for apps and services to use Google Maps; however, it’s more likely that Google will continue to tweak terms of service so users of Google Maps will increasingly have to accept advertising from Google pushed along with Google Map content.
Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/why-are-companies-defecting-from-google-maps/#ixzz277U5Xghq
Seems like the only people who don't worry about Google monetizing Google Maps by increasing advertising and mining their personal information for marketing purposes are the trolls that are getting paid by Google and Android manufacturers to jump online and raise a ruckus.
Well this certainly is a fiasco! First they lose Google search as the default in the Safari browser. Then they lose the YouTube app on iOS 6. Finally, they lose the maps app on iOS 6. Everyone knows that Google gets most of its mobile income from Apple devices.
This is all due to the greed of Google and Larry Page. Larry's reputation is shot and he should be fired immediately.
/s