Thanks for the link. The Navteq system seems to be the road based equivalent (with more bells and whistles) to the SAAB flight based recording system, they would fit together like a hand in a glove! I hope Apple is either licensing this or buying this company!
Yeah, before I knew about the Navteq system you may recall that since iOS 6 Maps beta was out I was suggesting such a system that would use tech similar to Flyover to do a digital mapping that would allow users a 3D street view. I really hope this comes to fruition in iOS 7. I'd think Navteq having a couple years to map, at least, the US would be sufficient time.
So apple struggles out of the gate with their map app which shows obvious potential for being the best app for maps once they fix a few things.
Googles already copying in their own misguided way (a 45 degree bitmap is still a bitmap).
And then to try to lambast all of apples Internet services because of this? Laughably reaching. Trying a bit too hard.
Mobile me had launch trouble because of how ambitious it was and quickly became known for being awesome. Not a negative.
Ping sims never was. And that's ok. Apple is just used to making everything they do perfect and desirable. So when ping turned out to not be all that wanted, they shuttered it. Much like google with its many experiments. And it's not like apple killed an ecosystem. Zune anyone? "plays4sure" yeah right...
In fact, from MobileMe to iTunes, to iCloud, apple seems to "get" Internet services like few companies do.
Apples headed in the right direction with maps. They'll have it in top form inside a year. That's saying a lot considering googles head start.
Here's hoping apple goes into the search business as well.
Prediction: Apple will have the best mapping service within a year.
I think that's only going to happen if Apple releases a web-based version of their mapping app. There's a lot of iOS users but there's significantly more web users. That's important for a service that relies on crowding-sourcing.
I haven't seen any problems in the places that i've searched for. I wonder how many people or search attempts for locations and directions are actually going to be affected.
Also, this just seems like a cheap shot at Apple. I remember when MapQuest and Google Maps first came out and they both were spotty in giving proper directions. I couldn't reliably use either one.
Yeah, I think Apple should have put more resources when they started to develop the app in cleaning up how it integrates information from various sources.
Safari, on the other hand is MUCH faster, which was a welcome improvement.
Either way, I find it funny that Cisco stopped selling their own Android tablets and now they own around 12,000 iPads internally. I guess Cisco doesn't like Android enough to continue using it internally. Maybe they know something the media hasn't covered.
Seems like nowadays we can rely on NYT to have a dig at Apple at every unfortunate incidents.
NYT is just a online newspaper. Fortunately for them there are an endless Apple haters read and comment on every Apple-related post. Well, that makes a lot of traffics then.
Thanks for the link. The Navteq system seems to be the road based equivalent (with more bells and whistles) to the SAAB flight based recording system, they would fit together like a hand in a glove! I hope Apple is either licensing this or buying this company!
Excuse me, but this is about the 30th post I've seen saying that Apple should buy Navteq. And it's time to kill this meme:
Navteq is a Chicago-based provider of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data and is a major provider of base electronic navigable maps. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia but operates independently.
All we all clear now?? Apple has money and talent to throw at this issue - but in terms of BUYING a company, they're gonna have to throw it somewhere else. Which does, one supposes, leave licensing, if they're truly the best alternative, as MS has influence at Nokia, and are lately more focused on suppressing Google than crossing swords with Cupertino.....
First off, most of these articles written for many of these publications like the NYT are written by journalists with questionable backgrounds in Technology. Most of them aren't really trained in computer science, programming, engineering. Most of them have a journalist background.
Journalism is just another fancy name for sensationalism to sell newspapers. Apple is a big target due to their success and these newspapers have always knocked Apple every time an issue comes up and they are typically much nicer to the lessor quality alternative when they have BIGGER problems.
I've talked to several Android users that are frustrated with their products and can't stand how their Samsung S III sucks.
I think that's only going to happen if Apple releases a web-based version of their mapping app. There's a lot of iOS users but there's significantly more web users. That's important for a service that relies on crowding-sourcing.
That is another necessary feature. If you try to share your Apple Maps from iOS right now the hyperlink is maps.apple.com/... but it will instantly switch to maps.google.com when it hits Apple's server. I can't image they will want to keep that up.
Something I read about the new Google Maps that really isn't getting much attention.
I heard that in order to use their new version of Google Maps for iOS6 that one has to jailbreak iOS 6. First off, if this is true, why is that? Is the new Google Maps not on Apple's App Store? if it isn't, why wouldn't they submit it? Are they afraid Apple will find out that it is written to gather information that might be considered malware?
Why would Google want Apple users to violate their warranty support by promoting Jailbreaking. to me, that's a bigger story.
Excuse me, but this is about the 30th post I've seen saying that Apple should buy Navteq. And it's time to kill this meme:
All we all clear now?? Apple has money and talent to throw at this issue - but in terms of BUYING a company, they're gonna have to throw it somewhere else. Which does, one supposes, leave licensing, if they're truly the best alternative, as MS has influence at Nokia, and are lately more focused on suppressing Google than crossing swords with Cupertino.....
I can't imagine the relevance of reporting that the original maps app was added only weeks before the debut. There were six months from then till the launch to perfect it. Pure sensationalism and weak journalism.
NY Times: "an apparent inability to make an internet-based product that worked"
That's right. I have used almost exclusively Apple products for 11 years and their Internet services are as reliably bad as their client devices and UI are good.
The real waste, the real sad thing, is thinking what they could have done with all the resources they put in to the maps app. What cool client side stuff they could have come up with, if they'd just admit that's what they're good at and outsource everything else.
Something I read about the new Google Maps that really isn't getting much attention.
I heard that in order to use their new version of Google Maps for iOS6 that one has to jailbreak iOS 6. First off, if this is true, why is that? Is the new Google Maps not on Apple's App Store? if it isn't, why wouldn't they submit it? Are they afraid Apple will find out that it is written to gather information that might be considered malware?
Why would Google want Apple users to violate their warranty support by promoting Jailbreaking. to me, that's a bigger story.
Google would need nothing sinister in their app to track users. Once you submit the location to Google they can simply gather all that on the back end.
I have only heard rumours of Google having an app ready, which was followed by rumours that Google doesn't have an app ready. There are several reasons Google might not want an app. 1) There app might just be shit so it will just weaken the way the masses feel right now. 2) They have had web-based maps for a long time now and will even have StreetView in them shortly. 3) Anything to helps make Apple Maps look like less of an issue for iDevice users hurts Google so they might simply hold off for now.
First off, most of these articles written for many of these publications like the NYT are written by journalists with questionable backgrounds in Technology. Most of them aren't really trained in computer science, programming, engineering. Most of them have a journalist background.
Journalism is just another fancy name for sensationalism to sell newspapers. Apple is a big target due to their success and these newspapers have always knocked Apple every time an issue comes up and they are typically much nicer to the lessor quality alternative when they have BIGGER problems.
I've talked to several Android users that are frustrated with their products and can't stand how their Samsung S III sucks.
I don't understand why you're against buying and licensing. It happens. We see subsidiaries get sold and companies licensing their tech all the time. Apple partners with at least a dozen companies just for their Maps backend.
I think that's only going to happen if Apple releases a web-based version of their mapping app. There's a lot of iOS users but there's significantly more web users. That's important for a service that relies on crowding-sourcing.
I was wondering why OS X doesn't have access to Apple maps yet.
Google would need nothing sinister in their app to track users. Once you submit the location to Google they can simply gather all that on the back end.
I have only heard rumours of Google having an app ready, which was followed by rumours that Google doesn't have an app ready. There are several reasons Google might not want an app. 1) There app might just be shit so it will just weaken the way the masses feel right now. 2) They have had web-based maps for a long time now and will even have StreetView in them shortly. 3) Anything to helps make Apple Maps look like less of an issue for iDevice users hurts Google so they might simply hold off for now.
It is a strange position they find themselves in though isn't it. Bring out an app and try to get iOS users back in their revenue stream (90%+ of mobile web traffic) or hope they hurt Apple more by not.
It is a strange position they find themselves in though isn't it. Bring out an app and try to get iOS users back in their revenue stream (90%+ of mobile web traffic) or hope they hurt Apple more by not.
Why do you think Google wants to hurt Apple? What are the benefits of doing so?
Comments
Yeah, before I knew about the Navteq system you may recall that since iOS 6 Maps beta was out I was suggesting such a system that would use tech similar to Flyover to do a digital mapping that would allow users a 3D street view. I really hope this comes to fruition in iOS 7. I'd think Navteq having a couple years to map, at least, the US would be sufficient time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko
Lol
So apple struggles out of the gate with their map app which shows obvious potential for being the best app for maps once they fix a few things.
Googles already copying in their own misguided way (a 45 degree bitmap is still a bitmap).
And then to try to lambast all of apples Internet services because of this? Laughably reaching. Trying a bit too hard.
Mobile me had launch trouble because of how ambitious it was and quickly became known for being awesome. Not a negative.
Ping sims never was. And that's ok. Apple is just used to making everything they do perfect and desirable. So when ping turned out to not be all that wanted, they shuttered it. Much like google with its many experiments. And it's not like apple killed an ecosystem. Zune anyone? "plays4sure" yeah right...
In fact, from MobileMe to iTunes, to iCloud, apple seems to "get" Internet services like few companies do.
Apples headed in the right direction with maps. They'll have it in top form inside a year. That's saying a lot considering googles head start.
Here's hoping apple goes into the search business as well.
Well said.
I think that's only going to happen if Apple releases a web-based version of their mapping app. There's a lot of iOS users but there's significantly more web users. That's important for a service that relies on crowding-sourcing.
I haven't seen any problems in the places that i've searched for. I wonder how many people or search attempts for locations and directions are actually going to be affected.
Also, this just seems like a cheap shot at Apple. I remember when MapQuest and Google Maps first came out and they both were spotty in giving proper directions. I couldn't reliably use either one.
Yeah, I think Apple should have put more resources when they started to develop the app in cleaning up how it integrates information from various sources.
Safari, on the other hand is MUCH faster, which was a welcome improvement.
Either way, I find it funny that Cisco stopped selling their own Android tablets and now they own around 12,000 iPads internally. I guess Cisco doesn't like Android enough to continue using it internally. Maybe they know something the media hasn't covered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
Seems like nowadays we can rely on NYT to have a dig at Apple at every unfortunate incidents.
NYT is just a online newspaper. Fortunately for them there are an endless Apple haters read and comment on every Apple-related post. Well, that makes a lot of traffics then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Thanks for the link. The Navteq system seems to be the road based equivalent (with more bells and whistles) to the SAAB flight based recording system, they would fit together like a hand in a glove! I hope Apple is either licensing this or buying this company!
Excuse me, but this is about the 30th post I've seen saying that Apple should buy Navteq. And it's time to kill this meme:
Quote:
Navteq is a Chicago-based provider of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data and is a major provider of base electronic navigable maps. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia but operates independently.
All we all clear now?? Apple has money and talent to throw at this issue - but in terms of BUYING a company, they're gonna have to throw it somewhere else. Which does, one supposes, leave licensing, if they're truly the best alternative, as MS has influence at Nokia, and are lately more focused on suppressing Google than crossing swords with Cupertino.....
First off, most of these articles written for many of these publications like the NYT are written by journalists with questionable backgrounds in Technology. Most of them aren't really trained in computer science, programming, engineering. Most of them have a journalist background.
Journalism is just another fancy name for sensationalism to sell newspapers. Apple is a big target due to their success and these newspapers have always knocked Apple every time an issue comes up and they are typically much nicer to the lessor quality alternative when they have BIGGER problems.
I've talked to several Android users that are frustrated with their products and can't stand how their Samsung S III sucks.
That is another necessary feature. If you try to share your Apple Maps from iOS right now the hyperlink is maps.apple.com/... but it will instantly switch to maps.google.com when it hits Apple's server. I can't image they will want to keep that up.
I didn't even know the old maps had Street View until I read about it a few months ago. I guess "drop a pin to use Street View" wasn't very intuitive.
So obviously I didn't cry when they took it away.
But I am enjoying the new turn-by-turn navigation that the old app lacked.
Something I read about the new Google Maps that really isn't getting much attention.
I heard that in order to use their new version of Google Maps for iOS6 that one has to jailbreak iOS 6. First off, if this is true, why is that? Is the new Google Maps not on Apple's App Store? if it isn't, why wouldn't they submit it? Are they afraid Apple will find out that it is written to gather information that might be considered malware?
Why would Google want Apple users to violate their warranty support by promoting Jailbreaking. to me, that's a bigger story.
How about Apple buying Nokia? Problem solved.
NY Times: "an apparent inability to make an internet-based product that worked"
That's right. I have used almost exclusively Apple products for 11 years and their Internet services are as reliably bad as their client devices and UI are good.
The real waste, the real sad thing, is thinking what they could have done with all the resources they put in to the maps app. What cool client side stuff they could have come up with, if they'd just admit that's what they're good at and outsource everything else.
Google would need nothing sinister in their app to track users. Once you submit the location to Google they can simply gather all that on the back end.
I have only heard rumours of Google having an app ready, which was followed by rumours that Google doesn't have an app ready. There are several reasons Google might not want an app. 1) There app might just be shit so it will just weaken the way the masses feel right now. 2) They have had web-based maps for a long time now and will even have StreetView in them shortly. 3) Anything to helps make Apple Maps look like less of an issue for iDevice users hurts Google so they might simply hold off for now.
I don't understand why you're against buying and licensing. It happens. We see subsidiaries get sold and companies licensing their tech all the time. Apple partners with at least a dozen companies just for their Maps backend.
I was wondering why OS X doesn't have access to Apple maps yet.
In 3 to 5years, 50% of all NYT readership and revenue will come from iOS Newstand. Of which, Apple will keep 30% of $
Another clear example of Apple unable to deliver in online services /s
It is a strange position they find themselves in though isn't it. Bring out an app and try to get iOS users back in their revenue stream (90%+ of mobile web traffic) or hope they hurt Apple more by not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
It is a strange position they find themselves in though isn't it. Bring out an app and try to get iOS users back in their revenue stream (90%+ of mobile web traffic) or hope they hurt Apple more by not.
Why do you think Google wants to hurt Apple? What are the benefits of doing so?