Hmmm. . . Over $20 per user? No doubt there's some defense involved but it seems pretty high to me if the rumored price is anywhere near accurate. Then again the guys at Google know a whole lot more about their business than we do.
It's not a defensive move, it's offensive, and blatantly so. Google does not need waze, certainly not for that price. Google are biters and scratchers. They are this way to make up for their lack of originality, and their insecurity after failing time and time again to come up with true innovations ala Apple. They throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. That's not creativity. When they fail, they use their financial recourses and internet dominance to strong arm others. I don't think the paid trolls and journalists are coming only from samsung. It's a style of management that began with schmitt, and which tweedle dee and tweedle dum are dutifully perpetuating. Do no evil my ass.
Here we go again with the "logical progression" BS.
So you're saying vector based GUI is not logical progression from raster based and Apple violated Google's IP by adapting vector based maps years after Google made the switch?
Pretty sure Google announced (note not released) their 3D mapping feature shortly before Apple in order to steal Apple's thunder, pretty much like what MS and HP tried to do with their "iTab" competitors.
Vector mapping was not new for Android, but was for iOS since Google seemed set on feature disparity. Do no evil, you know.
Bye bye Waze. I am sure Apple evaluated a purchase and decided 'not' was the better option. Looks like Maps is developing well.
IMO - except for street view, which is killer, both maps are about the same. Google has a few more POI perhaps and others like the Google public transit.
Regarding Apple evaluation of waze... well thats the question isn't it?
I have no idea about Apples internal plans etc, but it seems like Apple makes the offer (thats the rumor for Waze, dropbox and a few others) but significantly under what it may eventually be purchased for.
There is the issue of build internally or buy etc, but it sure 'appears' (purely based on AppleInsider articles over the years) to be a pattern that Apple just won't pull the lever on the big dollar purchase(over billion or so).
Just my observation out my arse, have no real knowledge.
Yes, introducing apps that feature the logical evolution of technology - vector based and 3D - is thinking very differently. Even more so when you announce it after your competitor does and somehow your users think you did it first. Sounds like the opposite of what Steve Jobs wants Apple to be doing.
Actually, I wasn't commenting on whether you were correct or not on who did what first, but rather your surprise at Apple users sometimes being crazy. Apple users (which I am one) generally have great affection for their Macs and perceive Google at best as untrustworthy, and at worst, as the enemy.
Maybe the Goog did announce first but given Apples lead, it is at least possible that Apple was working on this before Google.
Doesn't seem to be, does it? No one's doing it but Apple and Google, and only in specific instances; not across the board.
I think it is, OS-wide, but that isn't the point.
Only if Google had IP to violate and only if Apple's implementation violated it. Not sure why this is a logical step from the above, though.
The way Google and Apple promoted the vector-based systems they both convinced me it was the only logical evolution. But, I certainly don't know enough about it.
Vector based apps should not have any IP attached to it. I thought you were implying Google was somehow in the wrong here so I was being an ass about Google's IP.
Google altready HAS "Google Maps" so what's the idea?
I loaded Waza a while back at the advice of a friend and wasn't impressed. The traffic updates tend to happen when I can SEE the brakelights ahead of me: way too late, for instance.
I really love Waze! It's super functional and I love social integration. But now Google has bought Waze, I'm not sure if I want to use it anymore... Wish Apple had bought Waze and integrated in Apple Maps.
Google altready HAS "Google Maps" so what's the idea?
I loaded Waza a while back at the advice of a friend and wasn't impressed. The traffic updates tend to happen when I can SEE the brakelights ahead of me: way to late, for instance.
They basically bought it so that Apple wouldnt. They're utterly terrified they might lose the monopoly they currently have on maps at the hands of Apple.
You're wrong, but technically partly right. Your user name explains why you are being sloppy with the facts, Mr. Nexus. I'll explain.
It was widely KNOWN months before it was announced that Apple was working on Flyover data for their new maps app. Apple doesn't pre-announce products. In this case it was very well known and discussed in the tech media that Apple was working on Flyover data. FIVE DAYS before Apple's WWDC Google scheduled a hasty announcement in an attempt at damage control and an attempt to pre-empt Apple (June 6), and Google pre-announced they would be including flyover photos in the future and they demoed some very rudimentary examples. Shortly thereafter (June 11), Apple announced their SHIPPING Maps app with Flyover photos. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_announces_home_grown_maps_to_replace_google_maps/
It took Google months, maybe a year, before they included flyover photos in their maps app.
So, actually, it is correct to say Apple shipped it first and Google copied.
Regarding the announcement, you are technically right by FIVE DAYS but also totally wrong. Google pre-announced it shortly before Apple simultaneously announced it and SHIPPED it. Google didn't ship it until AFTER Apple did. Google was chasing Apple's tail the whole way, and probably would not have done any flyover without Apple doing it first.
It was widely seen as a damage-control pre-announcement by Google because it had became clear Apple was going to announce and ship it before Google. So Google chose to pre-announce a non-shipping feature, which is typical of them, as Microsoft does as well.
Regarding vector based, Google also boasted about this before it became a reality and even after it supposedly shipped much of their maps lacked it.
You are one of those irrational fandroids that should be thrown into a trash can with your "similar" stuff and "almost" truth statements.
Since when is that thing at 45º like flyover?
Fucking trolls, go vomit somewhere else.
You clearly know nothing about this. You live in your Apple world with your head in the sand.
Google maps for desktop which Apple doesn't have, is a recent beta that added a limited 45 degree 3D function.
Google earth for android has had the full every angle you want for months. This was demonstrated at a Google event before Apple maps was released. Nice try tho.
You're wrong, but technically partly right. Your user name explains why you are being sloppy with the facts, Mr. Nexus. I'll explain.
It was widely KNOWN months before it was announced that Apple was working on Flyover data for their new maps app. Apple doesn't pre-announce products. In this case it was very well known and discussed in the tech media that Apple was working on Flyover data. FIVE DAYS before Apple's WWDC Google scheduled a hasty announcement in an attempt at damage control and an attempt to pre-empt Apple (June 6), and Google pre-announced they would be including flyover photos in the future and they demoed some very rudimentary examples. Shortly thereafter (June 11), Apple announced their SHIPPING Maps app with Flyover photos. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_announces_home_grown_maps_to_replace_google_maps/
It took Google months, maybe a year, before they included flyover photos in their maps app.
So, actually, it is correct to say Apple shipped it first and Google copied.
Regarding the announcement, you are technically right by FIVE DAYS but also totally wrong. Google pre-announced it shortly before Apple simultaneously announced it and SHIPPED it. Google didn't ship it until AFTER Apple did. Google was chasing Apple's tail the whole way, and probably would not have done any flyover without Apple doing it first.
It was widely seen as a damage-control pre-announcement by Google because it had became clear Apple was going to announce and ship it before Google. So Google chose to pre-announce a non-shipping feature, which is typical of them, as Microsoft does as well.
Regarding vector based, Google also boasted about this before it became a reality and even after it supposedly shipped much of their maps lacked it.
You also forgot to mention that Google's now shipping flyover maps suffer from all the same Salvador Dali renders that everyone made fun of Apple for in Maps.
Hmmm. . . Over $20 per user? No doubt there's some defense involved but it seems pretty high to me if the rumored price is anywhere near accurate. Then again the guys at Google know a whole lot more about their business than we do.
My thought as well. Waze is an OK service but most use it (IMO) because it was independent. The quality if far below even Apple's maps and no where near Google's. The traffic data is so-so and it re-routed wrong for me both times I used it.
You are one of those irrational fandroids that should be thrown into a trash can with your "similar" stuff and "almost" truth statements.
Since when is that thing at 45º like flyover?
Fucking trolls, go vomit somewhere else.
I have the New Beta Google Maps. I experimented with it for about a week but then lost interest -- it is somewhere loosely between old Google Maps and Google Earth -- not particularly well implemented or very exciting compared to the current OSX apps.
IMO, Apple Maps on an iPad is superior to both.
Early this AM, I installed OSX Maverick. Apple Maps on the desktop blows all of them away (even iOS 6 Maps on an iPad 4).... You just can't compare the ease, beauty and fun of Apple 3D Flyover with anything else out there... Nothing comes close!
You are one of those irrational fandroids that should be thrown into a trash can with your "similar" stuff and "almost" truth statements.
Since when is that thing at 45º like flyover?
Fucking trolls, go vomit somewhere else.
You clearly know nothing about this. You live in your Apple world with your head in the sand.
Google maps for desktop which Apple doesn't have, is a recent beta that added a limited 45 degree 3D function.
Google earth for android has had the full every angle you want for months. This was demonstrated at a Google event before Apple maps was released. Nice try tho.
Why don't you post 3D shots of the Rose Bowl, Hoover Dam, and the Palace of Versailles, for a start... Using any current or beta Google Maps/Earth (whatever), running on the desktop, web or mobile... Then, let's compare with current iOS 6 running on an iPad 4 .
Comments
It's not a defensive move, it's offensive, and blatantly so. Google does not need waze, certainly not for that price. Google are biters and scratchers. They are this way to make up for their lack of originality, and their insecurity after failing time and time again to come up with true innovations ala Apple. They throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. That's not creativity. When they fail, they use their financial recourses and internet dominance to strong arm others. I don't think the paid trolls and journalists are coming only from samsung. It's a style of management that began with schmitt, and which tweedle dee and tweedle dum are dutifully perpetuating. Do no evil my ass.
Originally Posted by NexusPhan
…the logical evolution of technology…
Here we go again with the "logical progression" BS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Here we go again with the "logical progression" BS.
So you're saying vector based GUI is not logical progression from raster based and Apple violated Google's IP by adapting vector based maps years after Google made the switch?
Originally Posted by NexusPhan
So you're saying vector based GUI is not logical progression from raster based…
Doesn't seem to be, does it? No one's doing it but Apple and Google, and only in specific instances; not across the board.
I think it is, OS-wide, but that isn't the point.
…and Apple violated Google's IP by adapting vector based maps years after Google made the switch?
Only if Google had IP to violate and only if Apple's implementation violated it. Not sure why this is a logical step from the above, though.
Pretty sure Google announced (note not released) their 3D mapping feature shortly before Apple in order to steal Apple's thunder, pretty much like what MS and HP tried to do with their "iTab" competitors.
Vector mapping was not new for Android, but was for iOS since Google seemed set on feature disparity. Do no evil, you know.
Bye bye Waze. I am sure Apple evaluated a purchase and decided 'not' was the better option. Looks like Maps is developing well.
IMO - except for street view, which is killer, both maps are about the same. Google has a few more POI perhaps and others like the Google public transit.Regarding Apple evaluation of waze... well thats the question isn't it?
I have no idea about Apples internal plans etc, but it seems like Apple makes the offer (thats the rumor for Waze, dropbox and a few others) but significantly under what it may eventually be purchased for.
There is the issue of build internally or buy etc, but it sure 'appears' (purely based on AppleInsider articles over the years) to be a pattern that Apple just won't pull the lever on the big dollar purchase(over billion or so).
Just my observation out my arse, have no real knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan
Quote:
Originally Posted by chabig
He is serious. Apple introduced vector maps and 3D flyovers. A year later, Google introduced vector maps and airborne flyovers...
You're head isn't that deeply buried in the sand is it?
Google announced the 'flyover' before apple did (http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=22411)
Google has had vector based maps since 2010 (http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2010/12/07/google-maps-5-0-for-android-goes-vector-for-faster-loading-zoom/)
You guys are all insane.
You are one of those irrational fandroids that should be thrown into a trash can with your "similar" stuff and "almost" truth statements.
Since when is that thing at 45º like flyover?
Fucking trolls, go vomit somewhere else.
Actually, I wasn't commenting on whether you were correct or not on who did what first, but rather your surprise at Apple users sometimes being crazy. Apple users (which I am one) generally have great affection for their Macs and perceive Google at best as untrustworthy, and at worst, as the enemy.
Maybe the Goog did announce first but given Apples lead, it is at least possible that Apple was working on this before Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Doesn't seem to be, does it? No one's doing it but Apple and Google, and only in specific instances; not across the board.
I think it is, OS-wide, but that isn't the point.
Only if Google had IP to violate and only if Apple's implementation violated it. Not sure why this is a logical step from the above, though.
The way Google and Apple promoted the vector-based systems they both convinced me it was the only logical evolution. But, I certainly don't know enough about it.
Vector based apps should not have any IP attached to it. I thought you were implying Google was somehow in the wrong here so I was being an ass about Google's IP.
? ?
Google altready HAS "Google Maps" so what's the idea?
I loaded Waza a while back at the advice of a friend and wasn't impressed. The traffic updates tend to happen when I can SEE the brakelights ahead of me: way too late, for instance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138
? ?
Google altready HAS "Google Maps" so what's the idea?
I loaded Waza a while back at the advice of a friend and wasn't impressed. The traffic updates tend to happen when I can SEE the brakelights ahead of me: way to late, for instance.
They basically bought it so that Apple wouldnt. They're utterly terrified they might lose the monopoly they currently have on maps at the hands of Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NexusPhan
You're head isn't that deeply buried in the sand is it?
Google announced the 'flyover' before apple did (http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=22411)
Google has had vector based maps since 2010 (http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2010/12/07/google-maps-5-0-for-android-goes-vector-for-faster-loading-zoom/)
You guys are all insane.
You're wrong, but technically partly right. Your user name explains why you are being sloppy with the facts, Mr. Nexus. I'll explain.
It was widely KNOWN months before it was announced that Apple was working on Flyover data for their new maps app. Apple doesn't pre-announce products. In this case it was very well known and discussed in the tech media that Apple was working on Flyover data. FIVE DAYS before Apple's WWDC Google scheduled a hasty announcement in an attempt at damage control and an attempt to pre-empt Apple (June 6), and Google pre-announced they would be including flyover photos in the future and they demoed some very rudimentary examples. Shortly thereafter (June 11), Apple announced their SHIPPING Maps app with Flyover photos. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_announces_home_grown_maps_to_replace_google_maps/
It took Google months, maybe a year, before they included flyover photos in their maps app.
So, actually, it is correct to say Apple shipped it first and Google copied.
Regarding the announcement, you are technically right by FIVE DAYS but also totally wrong. Google pre-announced it shortly before Apple simultaneously announced it and SHIPPED it. Google didn't ship it until AFTER Apple did. Google was chasing Apple's tail the whole way, and probably would not have done any flyover without Apple doing it first.
It was widely seen as a damage-control pre-announcement by Google because it had became clear Apple was going to announce and ship it before Google. So Google chose to pre-announce a non-shipping feature, which is typical of them, as Microsoft does as well.
Regarding vector based, Google also boasted about this before it became a reality and even after it supposedly shipped much of their maps lacked it.
Google: taking the "innovation" page from Microsoft by simply purchasing developers. Wooooooooooo, impressive.
If YouTube is any indication then this service too will be complete shit in a couple years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
You are one of those irrational fandroids that should be thrown into a trash can with your "similar" stuff and "almost" truth statements.
Since when is that thing at 45º like flyover?
Fucking trolls, go vomit somewhere else.
You clearly know nothing about this. You live in your Apple world with your head in the sand.
Google maps for desktop which Apple doesn't have, is a recent beta that added a limited 45 degree 3D function.
Google earth for android has had the full every angle you want for months. This was demonstrated at a Google event before Apple maps was released. Nice try tho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apple101
You're wrong, but technically partly right. Your user name explains why you are being sloppy with the facts, Mr. Nexus. I'll explain.
It was widely KNOWN months before it was announced that Apple was working on Flyover data for their new maps app. Apple doesn't pre-announce products. In this case it was very well known and discussed in the tech media that Apple was working on Flyover data. FIVE DAYS before Apple's WWDC Google scheduled a hasty announcement in an attempt at damage control and an attempt to pre-empt Apple (June 6), and Google pre-announced they would be including flyover photos in the future and they demoed some very rudimentary examples. Shortly thereafter (June 11), Apple announced their SHIPPING Maps app with Flyover photos. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_announces_home_grown_maps_to_replace_google_maps/
It took Google months, maybe a year, before they included flyover photos in their maps app.
So, actually, it is correct to say Apple shipped it first and Google copied.
Regarding the announcement, you are technically right by FIVE DAYS but also totally wrong. Google pre-announced it shortly before Apple simultaneously announced it and SHIPPED it. Google didn't ship it until AFTER Apple did. Google was chasing Apple's tail the whole way, and probably would not have done any flyover without Apple doing it first.
It was widely seen as a damage-control pre-announcement by Google because it had became clear Apple was going to announce and ship it before Google. So Google chose to pre-announce a non-shipping feature, which is typical of them, as Microsoft does as well.
Regarding vector based, Google also boasted about this before it became a reality and even after it supposedly shipped much of their maps lacked it.
You also forgot to mention that Google's now shipping flyover maps suffer from all the same Salvador Dali renders that everyone made fun of Apple for in Maps.
My thought as well. Waze is an OK service but most use it (IMO) because it was independent. The quality if far below even Apple's maps and no where near Google's. The traffic data is so-so and it re-routed wrong for me both times I used it.
Some day Google will get sued because some asshat updates their Google Maps Waze traffic data while driving and causes an accident.
I have the New Beta Google Maps. I experimented with it for about a week but then lost interest -- it is somewhere loosely between old Google Maps and Google Earth -- not particularly well implemented or very exciting compared to the current OSX apps.
IMO, Apple Maps on an iPad is superior to both.
Early this AM, I installed OSX Maverick. Apple Maps on the desktop blows all of them away (even iOS 6 Maps on an iPad 4).... You just can't compare the ease, beauty and fun of Apple 3D Flyover with anything else out there... Nothing comes close!
Why don't you post 3D shots of the Rose Bowl, Hoover Dam, and the Palace of Versailles, for a start... Using any current or beta Google Maps/Earth (whatever), running on the desktop, web or mobile... Then, let's compare with current iOS 6 running on an iPad 4 .