Consumer Reports sucks in general, however, I think it is right here. If you are in the US, the Map application in many ways is better than what it replaces.
TIm Cook, however, should never have apologized. A statement explaining the situation maybe, but an apology wasn't warranted.
He didn't apologize for the product. He apologized for any inconvenience that customers might have experienced. That's a classic customer service device.
I use that all the time when a customer comes in with a ridiculous demand and is all bent out of shape over something that has absolutely nothing to do with our product. You say "I see that this really bothers you. I'm sorry that you're upset". That's an absolutely true statement but doesn't admit any flaw in your product. That's exactly what Cook did. It's too early to tell, but anecdotally, it seems to have defused some of the crap flying around (at least one person posting here said that their friend bought an iPhone because of Cook's apology).
It certainly beats the alternative of just ignoring the 'problem' and hoping it goes away.
Not like they thoroughly tested anything, really. They only tested navigation in urban areas in the US, that's hardly a thorough test. That information is provided by TomTom, so of course it would be accurate; try testing something that's not implemented by any other third parties, like pedestrian directions in the EU, and then report on the results.
Can you say "hypocrite"?
CR at least did a side-by-side test. Granted, it's limited and maybe extrapolating it to the whole world is unreasonable (after all, we know that Google Maps sucks in China), but it's the first data that compares the two side-by-side.
You, OTOH, are happy to condemn Apple with no data at all - much less a side-by-side comparison. So before you criticize CR for not testing the entire world, where's YOUR side-by-side data that shows Apple's Maps to be inferior?
This comes from an organization that takes bribes and chooses the Camry as one of the best cars in the world. It is meaningless.
I don't know about taking bribes, but there are plenty of examples of them using ridiculous criteria (some examples are provided above). There are also cases of them fabricating results (I believe it was the Suzuki SUV that they fabricated test results on). Most importantly, they just don't seem to know what they're talking about when it comes to computers. They consistently pick things on the basis of arbitrary criteria that change from day to day.
For example, I've seen them pick one computer over another because of a 1% difference in performance (based on a single test) - even when the faster computer is hundreds of dollars more. I've also seen them choose a computer that's 20 or 30% slower on the basis of it being "fast enough" in order to save $50 or so. They routinely choose a product that is not at the top of their rankings on the basis of some arbitrary or imagined deficiency (Apple's iPhone 4 which blew everyone else away in their rankings but was rejected due to the 'antenna problem' - even though every other phone has the same behavior.
CR may have been a reliable source of information 20 years ago. It may even be reliable today if you're looking for information about laundry detergents. But it's useless when it comes to computers.
There are also cases of them fabricating results (I believe it was the Suzuki SUV that they fabricated test results on).
I know Suzuki made some accusations against Consumer Reports which were dismissed. Is that enough for you to pronounce them guilty or is there another story on this where a court actually found they "made stuff up"?
As for being a great source for recommendations on computers, I'd tend to agree with you. I wouldn't base a purchase purely on what CR had to say about it. For that matter I wouldn't base any purchase purely on CR's opinion of it.
Used iOS6 maps on recent trip to Eastern Sierras, and loved it! Absolutely accurate, fun to use and reassuring. I've had automobile nav systems for almost ten years, and none compare. Every nav system goofs up occasionally. The criticisms of Apple Maps are based on hysteria.
The most poignant moment comes when all my apple friends say, "oh, I'll just download the google app." When the realization hits them that they can't, a huge perception bridge is crossed that is long-term very damaging for Apple. Time to open up and start disrupting other markets; like the carriers! BTW, traffic guidance and public transit are SO critical that I am surprised they let Apple Maps out without great performance on those 2 fronts. 3D is nice but not important when one has limited time and budget to get destinations or route guidance wrong.
I'm telling you that I "bought the highest capacity iPhone" 5 because That's Exactly What I Did
It's not that we don't believe you, no no. It's that we don't give a flying frick. It's nothing to do with any meaningful argument, and it, like your incessant posting of dozens of devices purchased without goal of use as designed, is nothing but bragging, posturing, and self-aggrandizing.
Originally Posted by matrix07
Is this your picture or theirs? That's QUITE an improvement.
Originally Posted by Infostack
When the realization hits them that they can't, a huge perception bridge is crossed that is long-term very damaging for Apple.
The people too stupid to go to maps.google.com will be too stupid to know that downloadable apps exist, anyway. I don't think this is much of a concern.
Eh, I wouldn't say it fabricated... blown out proportion? Yeah. ..
That's pretty much the same thing. It's the equivalent of saying, "that there are issues isn't fabricated, but the degree and extent of them is fabricated."
Google maps provided iPhone users with a significant risk of motor vehicle accidents, injury and deaths. What kind of screwed up values puts a "business edge" on providing turn by turn, voice directions on their own platform and denies this to hundreds of millions of drivers. Do the math. How many have died because Google, by its very nature, does Evil. While Consumer Reports has every reason to compare features, how about the biggest feature, safety. In the end Google prefers to harvest its consumers lambs to slaughter. Where is the outrage over this "business decision." Google- We steal; we maim; we kill."
This comes from an organization that takes bribes and chooses the Camry as one of the best cars in the world. It is meaningless.
I'm not aware of any allegations of bribery at CR, but their reviews, including this one, are meaningless. I mean, just look at their low-light photography results, which, inexplicably, are at odds with every other review out there. Clearly, they have a methodology problem, their reviews are riddled with biases, and they seem to often know very little about the products they are reviewing.
No one should ever base a buying decision on a CR review of anything.
Google maps provided iPhone users with a significant risk of motor vehicle accidents, injury and deaths. What kind of screwed up values puts a "business edge" on providing turn by turn, voice directions on their own platform and denies this to hundreds of millions of drivers. Do the math. How many have died because Google, by its very nature, does Evil. While Consumer Reports has every reason to compare features, how about the biggest feature, safety. In the end Google prefers to harvest its consumers lambs to slaughter. Where is the outrage over this "business decision." Google- We steal; we maim; we kill."
I know Suzuki made some accusations against Consumer Reports which were dismissed. Is that enough for you to pronounce them guilty or is there another story on this where a court actually found they "made stuff up"?
CR said that the Suzuki rolled over easily in turns.
Suzuki hired an outside failure consultant who determined that the Suzuki did NOT roll over easily in turns.
After extensive fighting back and forth, the two parties agreed to drop the case before a decision was ever reached - HOWEVER, CR had to publicly state that the Suzuki did NOT roll over in routine driving. So their initial statement that it "rolls over easily in turns" was clearly false.
Back on topic. We used an iPad 3 with iOS 6 (beta) recently on a trip to Disney, and the new Maps was invaluable and honestly very accurate. Granted it's a popular locale, in a major US city, but that's a pretty typical situation where you're going to be using navigation. Back at home, I live in a newer development that is continually expanding. Here Google Maps and Apple Maps are both missing streets and features. Both have some things in the wrong place. This is to be expected, since they're moving/adding/removing roads as they go. Surprisingly, both are nearly identical though, so I'm guessing much of this has to do with how mapping companies receive information from municipalities.
Now, the group noted "having more thoroughly tested Apple Maps alongside a Samsung Galaxy S3 running Android 4.0.4 (Ice Cream Sandwich) with Google Maps, we have a more favorable opinion
So first it was bad but now it is better?
Way to destroy your own credibility...
Well, it seems everyone is primed to take a chink out of Apple's armor.
What I think is interesting is they take the best of class Android, and then compare that to the iPhone -- which means that everyone else using an Android might experience WORSE results, whereas people are usually more up to date (and can actually update most phones over a 4 year span) on the iPhone.
The CONSUMER is going to the iPhone, not because it's just a "hip thing" but because of reliability. It's like the OLD Windows 98 comparisons that made fun of Mac users for their expensive lifestyle choice, but whenever someone using a Win Box was talking to a poor sap with a poorly performing Win Box -- they would invariably say; "Who, you got the HP? You should have gotten the Dell -- business class, the consumer versions suck." Or they might tell you the parts list and the motherboard to get to build your own. That's the Android experience; all comparisons are made with the BEST OF CLASS, and if something happens to suck; well that's because you were dumb enough to get the MyTouch.
My wife's MyTouch by the way, is a clunky POS -- but she just uses the browser and very few apps. I wanted to save money. If I had the money to get a Galaxy S3 -- despite whatever marginal "gee wiz" thing it might have over the iPhone -- the iPhone is always the better investment. 1 year from now, it will update, and things will be running smoothly -- no guarantees with these other phones.
Google maps provided iPhone users with a significant risk of motor vehicle accidents, injury and deaths. What kind of screwed up values puts a "business edge" on providing turn by turn, voice directions on their own platform and denies this to hundreds of millions of drivers. Do the math. How many have died because Google, by its very nature, does Evil. While Consumer Reports has every reason to compare features, how about the biggest feature, safety. In the end Google prefers to harvest its consumers lambs to slaughter. Where is the outrage over this "business decision." Google- We steal; we maim; we kill."
What REALLY annoys me with this really POOR REPORTING is that nobody compares the Apple Maps to the Google Maps on an iPhone. When they talk of Apple's hubris, or being too late to the map party, they don't bother to talk about how left behind Google was leaving their iPhone development.
And YES, distractions and business should LOSE POINTS on a map app. Apple will probably add more features, but the default screen should be much less cluttered with ONLY what you need to see, and a user needs to see the path from the distractions at a glance. MORE = more accidents, not more power.
I'm not making an excuse for Apple's "new" offering and growing pains -- just agreeing that Apple did their homework once again on usability. 95% of the people don't use 90% of the gee-wiz features, so getting the basics down is the most important evaluation.
However -- I can't agree with the hyperbole over Google's datamining - though it is bad, Apple is now integrating FaceBook. It should be a highly controlled option -- but having it seem so casual for users means that a third-party gets to datamine EVERYTHING they do. Of course, at least with iPhone you can turn most of it off.
>> Also -- apple having the controls for apps sending and receiving data in THEIR settings menu, might be less intuitive -- but it's a better way to control things than "in the app." One, because every app can have a different way of hiding settings, and Two, because a developer with less scruples could be tricking you into sharing your data. So I'd much prefer having absolute knowledge of all apps, rather than an honor system that only fails with the worst offenders and you leak data (and battery life) like a sieve.
As a long time Apple user and deeply embedded in the entire eco system I am extremely disappointed in what they have produced to replace the Google based version in iOS6. Why release it now when Maps clearly isn't ready for even average use? I can understand the vision but the Maps product as it is justmakes Apple look un-prepared. It gives the naysayers an opening.
I used my iPad to plan and execute a 1,600km round journey in the car with my family last week (I am in Australia). Forget about turn by turn, I just wanted to work out a route with overnight stopping points. The new app is far less than sub optimal even for this. Even zooming in very close didn't show the names of almost all major (60,000 population) or minor towns along the route - how do you plan stops in your journey if you don't know where towns are? You should have to zoom into very close distances to be able to see there is town actually down there. In a lot of cases when it does show the name of the town it placed it 50km from the actual location (although the streets were in the right place). This leads you to switch to satellite view and where Maps says there is supposed to be a large town there is just trees and grassland. And once I got to my destination it couldn't find a number of locations and even a few street addresses -- Google maps found them all. I know that Apple is partnering with many companies for this data but that data is either imcomplete or isn't being integrated into the app very well at present.
And streetview is sorely missed when research a location.
Right now, this far from being as useful a tool as the previous Google based version.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fithian
This comes from an organization that takes bribes and chooses the Camry as one of the best cars in the world. It is meaningless.
Takes bribes? Explain more please.
He didn't apologize for the product. He apologized for any inconvenience that customers might have experienced. That's a classic customer service device.
I use that all the time when a customer comes in with a ridiculous demand and is all bent out of shape over something that has absolutely nothing to do with our product. You say "I see that this really bothers you. I'm sorry that you're upset". That's an absolutely true statement but doesn't admit any flaw in your product. That's exactly what Cook did. It's too early to tell, but anecdotally, it seems to have defused some of the crap flying around (at least one person posting here said that their friend bought an iPhone because of Cook's apology).
It certainly beats the alternative of just ignoring the 'problem' and hoping it goes away.
Can you say "hypocrite"?
CR at least did a side-by-side test. Granted, it's limited and maybe extrapolating it to the whole world is unreasonable (after all, we know that Google Maps sucks in China), but it's the first data that compares the two side-by-side.
You, OTOH, are happy to condemn Apple with no data at all - much less a side-by-side comparison. So before you criticize CR for not testing the entire world, where's YOUR side-by-side data that shows Apple's Maps to be inferior?
I don't know about taking bribes, but there are plenty of examples of them using ridiculous criteria (some examples are provided above). There are also cases of them fabricating results (I believe it was the Suzuki SUV that they fabricated test results on). Most importantly, they just don't seem to know what they're talking about when it comes to computers. They consistently pick things on the basis of arbitrary criteria that change from day to day.
For example, I've seen them pick one computer over another because of a 1% difference in performance (based on a single test) - even when the faster computer is hundreds of dollars more. I've also seen them choose a computer that's 20 or 30% slower on the basis of it being "fast enough" in order to save $50 or so. They routinely choose a product that is not at the top of their rankings on the basis of some arbitrary or imagined deficiency (Apple's iPhone 4 which blew everyone else away in their rankings but was rejected due to the 'antenna problem' - even though every other phone has the same behavior.
CR may have been a reliable source of information 20 years ago. It may even be reliable today if you're looking for information about laundry detergents. But it's useless when it comes to computers.
Look at Bergamo (Italy) for example.
Impressive.
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There are also cases of them fabricating results (I believe it was the Suzuki SUV that they fabricated test results on).
I know Suzuki made some accusations against Consumer Reports which were dismissed. Is that enough for you to pronounce them guilty or is there another story on this where a court actually found they "made stuff up"?
As for being a great source for recommendations on computers, I'd tend to agree with you. I wouldn't base a purchase purely on what CR had to say about it. For that matter I wouldn't base any purchase purely on CR's opinion of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
Which University is that? What is the address?
Yokohama City University - Kanazawa Hakkei Campus
Originally Posted by DaHarder
I'm telling you that I "bought the highest capacity iPhone" 5 because That's Exactly What I Did
It's not that we don't believe you, no no. It's that we don't give a flying frick. It's nothing to do with any meaningful argument, and it, like your incessant posting of dozens of devices purchased without goal of use as designed, is nothing but bragging, posturing, and self-aggrandizing.
Originally Posted by matrix07
Is this your picture or theirs? That's QUITE an improvement.
Originally Posted by Infostack
When the realization hits them that they can't, a huge perception bridge is crossed that is long-term very damaging for Apple.
The people too stupid to go to maps.google.com will be too stupid to know that downloadable apps exist, anyway. I don't think this is much of a concern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
Eh, I wouldn't say it fabricated... blown out proportion? Yeah. ..
That's pretty much the same thing. It's the equivalent of saying, "that there are issues isn't fabricated, but the degree and extent of them is fabricated."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fithian
This comes from an organization that takes bribes and chooses the Camry as one of the best cars in the world. It is meaningless.
I'm not aware of any allegations of bribery at CR, but their reviews, including this one, are meaningless. I mean, just look at their low-light photography results, which, inexplicably, are at odds with every other review out there. Clearly, they have a methodology problem, their reviews are riddled with biases, and they seem to often know very little about the products they are reviewing.
No one should ever base a buying decision on a CR review of anything.
CR said that the Suzuki rolled over easily in turns.
Suzuki hired an outside failure consultant who determined that the Suzuki did NOT roll over easily in turns.
After extensive fighting back and forth, the two parties agreed to drop the case before a decision was ever reached - HOWEVER, CR had to publicly state that the Suzuki did NOT roll over in routine driving. So their initial statement that it "rolls over easily in turns" was clearly false.
Back on topic. We used an iPad 3 with iOS 6 (beta) recently on a trip to Disney, and the new Maps was invaluable and honestly very accurate. Granted it's a popular locale, in a major US city, but that's a pretty typical situation where you're going to be using navigation. Back at home, I live in a newer development that is continually expanding. Here Google Maps and Apple Maps are both missing streets and features. Both have some things in the wrong place. This is to be expected, since they're moving/adding/removing roads as they go. Surprisingly, both are nearly identical though, so I'm guessing much of this has to do with how mapping companies receive information from municipalities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom
....they don't.
They do, well in Australia they do:-
http://www.navigon.com/portal/au/produkte/navigationssoftware/navigon-mobile-navigator-android.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
Now, the group noted "having more thoroughly tested Apple Maps alongside a Samsung Galaxy S3 running Android 4.0.4 (Ice Cream Sandwich) with Google Maps, we have a more favorable opinion
So first it was bad but now it is better?
Way to destroy your own credibility...
Well, it seems everyone is primed to take a chink out of Apple's armor.
What I think is interesting is they take the best of class Android, and then compare that to the iPhone -- which means that everyone else using an Android might experience WORSE results, whereas people are usually more up to date (and can actually update most phones over a 4 year span) on the iPhone.
The CONSUMER is going to the iPhone, not because it's just a "hip thing" but because of reliability. It's like the OLD Windows 98 comparisons that made fun of Mac users for their expensive lifestyle choice, but whenever someone using a Win Box was talking to a poor sap with a poorly performing Win Box -- they would invariably say; "Who, you got the HP? You should have gotten the Dell -- business class, the consumer versions suck." Or they might tell you the parts list and the motherboard to get to build your own. That's the Android experience; all comparisons are made with the BEST OF CLASS, and if something happens to suck; well that's because you were dumb enough to get the MyTouch.
My wife's MyTouch by the way, is a clunky POS -- but she just uses the browser and very few apps. I wanted to save money. If I had the money to get a Galaxy S3 -- despite whatever marginal "gee wiz" thing it might have over the iPhone -- the iPhone is always the better investment. 1 year from now, it will update, and things will be running smoothly -- no guarantees with these other phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfhow1
Google maps provided iPhone users with a significant risk of motor vehicle accidents, injury and deaths. What kind of screwed up values puts a "business edge" on providing turn by turn, voice directions on their own platform and denies this to hundreds of millions of drivers. Do the math. How many have died because Google, by its very nature, does Evil. While Consumer Reports has every reason to compare features, how about the biggest feature, safety. In the end Google prefers to harvest its consumers lambs to slaughter. Where is the outrage over this "business decision." Google- We steal; we maim; we kill."
What REALLY annoys me with this really POOR REPORTING is that nobody compares the Apple Maps to the Google Maps on an iPhone. When they talk of Apple's hubris, or being too late to the map party, they don't bother to talk about how left behind Google was leaving their iPhone development.
And YES, distractions and business should LOSE POINTS on a map app. Apple will probably add more features, but the default screen should be much less cluttered with ONLY what you need to see, and a user needs to see the path from the distractions at a glance. MORE = more accidents, not more power.
I'm not making an excuse for Apple's "new" offering and growing pains -- just agreeing that Apple did their homework once again on usability. 95% of the people don't use 90% of the gee-wiz features, so getting the basics down is the most important evaluation.
However -- I can't agree with the hyperbole over Google's datamining - though it is bad, Apple is now integrating FaceBook. It should be a highly controlled option -- but having it seem so casual for users means that a third-party gets to datamine EVERYTHING they do. Of course, at least with iPhone you can turn most of it off.
>> Also -- apple having the controls for apps sending and receiving data in THEIR settings menu, might be less intuitive -- but it's a better way to control things than "in the app." One, because every app can have a different way of hiding settings, and Two, because a developer with less scruples could be tricking you into sharing your data. So I'd much prefer having absolute knowledge of all apps, rather than an honor system that only fails with the worst offenders and you leak data (and battery life) like a sieve.
As a long time Apple user and deeply embedded in the entire eco system I am extremely disappointed in what they have produced to replace the Google based version in iOS6. Why release it now when Maps clearly isn't ready for even average use? I can understand the vision but the Maps product as it is justmakes Apple look un-prepared. It gives the naysayers an opening.
I used my iPad to plan and execute a 1,600km round journey in the car with my family last week (I am in Australia). Forget about turn by turn, I just wanted to work out a route with overnight stopping points. The new app is far less than sub optimal even for this. Even zooming in very close didn't show the names of almost all major (60,000 population) or minor towns along the route - how do you plan stops in your journey if you don't know where towns are? You should have to zoom into very close distances to be able to see there is town actually down there. In a lot of cases when it does show the name of the town it placed it 50km from the actual location (although the streets were in the right place). This leads you to switch to satellite view and where Maps says there is supposed to be a large town there is just trees and grassland. And once I got to my destination it couldn't find a number of locations and even a few street addresses -- Google maps found them all. I know that Apple is partnering with many companies for this data but that data is either imcomplete or isn't being integrated into the app very well at present.
And streetview is sorely missed when research a location.
Right now, this far from being as useful a tool as the previous Google based version.