Apple Maps 3D Flyover support comes to Paris

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 61
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,510member
    Odd, that we have Paris... but not Washington, DC...

    I want Moscow, Dubrovnik, Granada, Pisa, Lima, Machu Picchu, Lake Titicaca (that's a dirty), The Interlachen area, Nice, Heidelberg, Ronda...

    I want Japanese cities. Kyoto and Tokyo. Brasilia, Marrakech, Venice, Istanbul, and the towns you gave are pretty good too.
    Venice is a must.
    I think this is great, and very useful to access contrary to what some say. I don't understand how anyone can say that it's complicated to use.
  • Reply 22 of 61
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,507member
    vorsos wrote: »
    At this rate, they will add average-sized midwest cities by 2023.
    wdowell go_quote.gif

    Ive ditched Apple Maps.
    Ive was never on that team; he is the head of industrial design.

    St. Louis Park, MN Population 45,882 (2011)
  • Reply 23 of 61
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post



    This makes no sense. Why is Apple wasting resources on flyovers? Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- uses this feature of Maps. I don't think anybody even knows how to get into this feature of the Maps app, let alone using it once they're there. Apple should be focusing on fixing all their broken & terrible directions, instead of something superfluous like flyovers. Seriously, Apple, get your act together.


    Glad to know that the value I got from it in Milan recently was totally in my imagination.


    Perhaps you should stick to speaking for yourself?

  • Reply 24 of 61
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post





    Directions and search are too separate things altogether. Directions work fine. Search is a disaster. I search for Starbucks while looking at Paris and it shows me a random Starbucks in Texas (just a random example). Just try searching for Googleplex.


     


    I agree.


     


    With maps now, I tend to search with Google, bag the exact address, or even co-ordinates, then bung them into Apple Maps for directions.


     


    I find the Maps app much better than Googles.  I only managed to get Google Maps to give me directions once, and I can't work out how I did it.  The Apple app is clean, easy to use etc.  It just has dreadful search capabilities.


     


    I hope the search chap they hired from Amazon fixes that.

  • Reply 25 of 61
    mudman2mudman2 Posts: 54member
    The only reason Google expends the $$ it has and does on Maps is that value of the imprints must be astounding.

    The more Apple invests the more it diverts revenue away from Google

    I like
  • Reply 26 of 61
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,215member
    gqb wrote: »
    Glad to know that the value I got from it in Milan recently was totally in my imagination.
    Perhaps you should stick to speaking for yourself?

    I'm with you. I love to research a place in 3D in advance of a visit. It never fails that when i get there I have a far better 'feeling' for the place and my way around. I suspect a lot of those who see no value may not create mental 3D images in their minds as many of us do. Certainly a fascinating research project for a psychology study. Cats, I read recently, create very elaborate 3D maps of their locale and update it whenever they perceive a change. It is to do with being able to more successfully pounce on prey and or escape from predators wanting a feline snack those studying this conjecture, an evolutionary gift as it were. Perhaps some humans have a similar trait whilst others for some reason don't. Then again maybe it is a talent that has to be learned in humans.
  • Reply 27 of 61
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,577member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post I only managed to get Google Maps to give me directions once, and I can't work out how I did it. 


    There's a couple of ways to get directions. The first is to tap on the Directions icon on the right side of the Map search bar. Another is to tap navigation from the search results page within the Google Maps app.

  • Reply 28 of 61
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,215member
    Please Apple bring maps to OS X soon.
  • Reply 29 of 61
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,147member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post



    Directions and search are too separate things altogether. Directions work fine. Search is a disaster. I search for Starbucks while looking at Paris and it shows me a random Starbucks in Texas (just a random example). Just try searching for Googleplex.


    Considering that any maps app must search the address first before it can provide directions, in what planet are they "too (two) separate things altogether"? image

  • Reply 30 of 61
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,215member
    Considering that any maps app must search the address first before it can provide directions, in what planet are they "too (two) separate things altogether"? :rolleyes:

    I kind of see what he means though. You could have no 3D at all in the one and a different program that had a database of cities in 3D just for educational value. Having said that you are right to infer the later certainly increases in value if it is searchable and we can morph the same location back and forth between 2D and 3D ... which is exactly what we have or are at least on the way to getting.
  • Reply 31 of 61
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    There's a couple of ways to get directions. The first is to tap on the Directions icon on the right side of the Map search bar. Another is to tap navigation from the search results page within the Google Maps app.



     


    You're a genius!


     


    Or I'm an idiot.


     


    Or both!

  • Reply 32 of 61
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,507member
    Please Apple bring maps to OS X soon.

    Oh, yeah... Then add a large retina display Mac
  • Reply 33 of 61
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,141member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post



    This makes no sense. Why is Apple wasting resources on flyovers? Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- uses this feature of Maps. I don't think anybody even knows how to get into this feature of the Maps app, let alone using it once they're there. Apple should be focusing on fixing all their broken & terrible directions, instead of something superfluous like flyovers. Seriously, Apple, get your act together.


     


    I knew as soon as I read the headline we'd get at least one of these mind-numbing posts, and like clockwork, here you come. 


     


    Yeah, because obviously Flyover additions are done INSTEAD of directions, right? No there's no fucking way in hell these things are actually COMPLETELY independent of each other, have separate teams, and can be done at the same time, right? What makes absolutely "no sense" is your logic, not to mention that you pull facts, statements, and assumptions out of your ass simply to troll. 


     


    1. Apple has invested a significant amount of resources into the technique of creating flyovers, and it's only logical and reasonable that they would expand it to eventually cover all major cities. I guarantee you there are millions of people who would love to browse a 3D version of Paris. 


     


    2. Who says "nobody" is using it? I like the fact that you had to emphasize it twice, because thats what you do when you make shit up. I've used it many, many times and find it especially useful in new cities, where it gives an excellent sense of the environment and the neighborhood, which you can then recognize from flyover. Not only that, it happens to also be incredibly cool and fun to use, which doesn't hurt. It's also more flexible, robust, and updatable than streetview. There's no reason in hell Apple should scrap or drop it. It also strands to reason that the more places its available, the more it will be used. 


     


    3. "Broken and terrible directions"- oh, really? I guess I must have been using a different version of maps then, which I've used in 5 cities so far and which has gotten me where I needed to go 100% of the time, hundreds of times- often using better and more efficient routes than google maps. But hey, it's "broken" cause you said so, just like how "nobody" uses flyover. 


     


    4. I'm very certain Apple has their "act together", infinitely more than a message board troll like you who hurls attacks while not taking a few seconds to think those attacks through. 

  • Reply 34 of 61

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post





    Directions and search are too separate things altogether. Directions work fine. Search is a disaster. I search for Starbucks while looking at Paris and it shows me a random Starbucks in Texas (just a random example). Just try searching for Googleplex.


    Paris, TX?

  • Reply 35 of 61
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post





    Directions and search are too separate things altogether. Directions work fine. Search is a disaster. I search for Starbucks while looking at Paris and it shows me a random Starbucks in Texas (just a random example). Just try searching for Googleplex.


    Please tell me you didn't enter "Starbucks Paris" and are confused that it brought back hits from Paris TX.

  • Reply 36 of 61

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



    Odd, that we have Paris... but not Washington, DC...



    I want Moscow, Dubrovnik, Granada, Pisa, Lima, Machu Picchu, Lake Titicaca (that's a dirty), The Interlachen area, Nice, Heidelberg, Ronda...


    Wonder if the delay for D.C. has to do with flyover permissions? Not sure how close the planes have to be in order to do the mapping. Maybe they're running into issues with the Secret Service throwing fits?

  • Reply 37 of 61
    ecsecs Posts: 307member
    I admit flyover looks nice. I don't use it because gmaps works better for me, and because I need streetview (I usually need to see buildings and streets because of my work, and streetview saves me from going to the real site until really needed, which is really helpful). Also, the number of supported cities in flyover is a joke.

    Flyover looks nice, but it's not a work tool, just candy.
  • Reply 38 of 61
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,758member
    scotty321 wrote: »
    This makes no sense. Why is Apple wasting resources on flyovers? Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- uses this feature of Maps. I don't think anybody even knows how to get into this feature of the Maps app, let alone using it once they're there. Apple should be focusing on fixing all their broken & terrible directions, instead of something superfluous like flyovers. Seriously, Apple, get your act together.

    I disagree. And it's easy to prove you wrong if you're going to insist on absolute terms like "nobody." I for one find it useful. Anyone who has ever played a strategy game gets why a flyover-style view of the world is useful for navigation and planning. And don't even get me started on broken directions. I did a road trip from LA to Vegas with stops in small towns along the way and iOS 6 Maps POI database was consistently more current than Google Maps' database, despite the flyover issues.
  • Reply 39 of 61
    zandroszandros Posts: 537member
    chandra69 wrote: »
    Its not bad algorithm.  There are millions of trees to touch. And there is only one Arch de Triomphe and only one Eiffel Tower.
    Do you want Apple to touch all the Trees that are not significant on maps?

    Not at all, it was just an observation that it doesn't seem to handle things that have free space under them very well.
  • Reply 40 of 61
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    Odd, that we have Paris... but not Washington, DC...

    I want Moscow, Dubrovnik, Granada, Pisa, Lima, Machu Picchu, Lake Titicaca (that's a dirty), The Interlachen area, Nice, Heidelberg, Ronda...

    Considering that a large section of Washington D.C. is designated as a no fly zone, they may not be able to capture the necessary data in the areas that would be most valuable; e.g. Lincoln Monument, National Mall, Smithsonian National Museum, United States Capitol, Washington Monument.
Sign In or Register to comment.