I personally have half of my clients upgraded, whereas the other half actually can't upgrade on many of their production machines due to outdated software still in use. Also, some of that software, like FreeHand, will never be updated because it's EOLed by Adobe and Adobe has taken away the ability in CS6 or CC to open FH files in Illustrator. Those clients just can't afford to throw away 20+ years worth of files and easy access to them.
Those clients and machines that aren't in the above situation have all been updated to ML (skipped Lion).... and they all enjoy it.
Clients? I'm talking about regular home users. I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Author states only was to teport a problem is via Yelp. But in Maps directions if you touch the turned-up page corner in the lower right corner of the screen there is a report a problem button. Used it several times but have never gone back to check if there was a fix.
If any of the problems I have submitted ever get fixed, I'll let you know.
I can say the same thing about mapquest and google maps. Been reporting errors with them for years and most of them have never been fixed
So darned what?!
We're talking about Apple, not Google or MapQuest. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that 'report a problem' is moot. In which case, this whole thread -- including your post -- is completely pointless, no?
1. They verify every report to make sure no one is pranking
2. If you are reporting a telephone number issue then you prosbby need to report that to Yelp directly (the button in question is likely for map errors only).
At the yelp website I can't enter luxembourg as country ?
Submitting the error to yelp should therefore be a problem :-)
I also agree Mavericks should be free. Not because I believe that people are entitled to free shit, and not because I don't believe Mavericks is an awesome OS that has alot of inherent value, but because making it free would ensure massive adoption, less OSX fragmentation, strengthen Apple's ecosystem, and the fact that the $20 or whatever that it may cost would be an utterly irrelevant monetary value for Apple- increasing adoption of the OS by making it free would have much more pervasive and positive repercussions.
The sad fact is that the majority of people do not pay for software updates, as they do not understand the benefits. Just make it free and get it over with.
I don't buy that argument. It's like those who argue that Apple will never produce an integrated TV because people don't renew them every two years. It doesn't make sense. They'd be lucky if they make $30 profit on the current Apple TV, and people don't buy a new one of those every two years either.
No. I think making Mavericks free just makes too much sense for Apple not to be seriously considering it. And this is the first time in living memory where they didn't announce a price. Besides, by giving it away for it free it makes the Mac far more appealing; it will sell more Macs, makes Mac users happier, makes Mac developers' lives a lot easier; by making their potential sales pool much larger, would make the platform FAR stronger. There are just too many good points.
"You mean now the Mac works just like the iPhone? You get free major updates every year? Wow!"
That's very appealing.
And it'd be very excising. And it allows Apple to push new software directions and associate services a lot more easily.
In fairness to the people arguing against the apple integrated TV one must point out that to date apple hasn't released an integrated TV.
The current Apple TV isn't being upgraded every two years because its been around for quite a while now and we are still only on gen 3. There simply isn't new hardware to upgrade to after two years.
I still think that the number of people unwilling to upgrade is minuscule. $20/year for amazing new features is already a pretty sweet deal.
Please someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm not sure if Apple is even allowed to make Mavericks free if the wanted to. Something about accounting laws in the US, or Sarbane-Oakley thingy-law?
I've heard this, but I've never seen the actual law or rationale behind it. Anyone care to weigh in?
What I would like Apple do with maps is take advantage of there faster method of scanning data (plane VS google street view) The plus on that tech is then can show 3D rendering of everything in a scan region while street view, while more detail, is limited to what you can see... from the street.
So why not scan the entire world and make a 3D view of it? I was expecting to have a lot more 3D coverage in Apple maps. Granted Google has a huge head start with street view, but it should be faster to scan with planes.
imo, beside map accuracy and metadata inputs, 3D coverage is key here. Can Apple maps accept user pictures like google does?
It isn't quite as simple as that... There are many areas of the world that are sensitive politically, militarily, nationally... Apple getting virtual 3D Flyover [mapping] of Paris is a real coup -- you cannot actually fly over that area without prior approval to a very restricted/limited route and time.
By comparison, Google maps/earth 3D Flyover of Paris is primitive.
I see you live in Montreal... I've never been there, but it looks good in 3D.
I did a search for poutine (ah, poutine...) and got 8 hits near the downtown area.
If any of the problems I have submitted ever get fixed, I'll let you know.
I submitted a change for an elementary school location on two occasions. It took about 60 days for it to be corrected on maps. This has been my only experience so far.
Clients? I'm talking about regular home users. I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Sorry... my clients as an Apple and print consultant here in Germany.
However... all of the home users (or people that don't need certain software that used Rosetta) that * I * know, have upgraded to ML. Some happen to be clients as well.
I also agree Mavericks should be free. Not because I believe that people are entitled to free shit, and not because I don't believe Mavericks is an awesome OS that has alot of inherent value, but because making it free would ensure massive adoption, less OSX fragmentation, strengthen Apple's ecosystem, and the fact that the $20 or whatever that it may cost would be an utterly irrelevant monetary value for Apple- increasing adoption of the OS by making it free would have much more pervasive and positive repercussions.
The sad fact is that the majority of people do not pay for software updates, as they do not understand the benefits. Just make it free and get it over with.
Actually, I also agree with this idea.
It's something Apple could do to make it really, really hurt in certain male regions for the guys up North pushing Blue Doorways...:smokey:
I've heard this, but I've never seen the actual law or rationale behind it. Anyone care to weigh in?
As I understood it, this whole thing had to do with concerns over running afoul of revenue recognition when selling a product. If you sell something for its full price up front, but provide some 'free' accessory or service further down the road that substantially enhances the functionality of the original purchase, the question is whether the seller should have waited to recognize a part of the revenue until this new functionality was introduced.
One way to forestall any potential problem is to simply charge for the new accessory or service.
The whole thing seems to have been driven by CFOs running scared of gray areas in Sarbanes-Oxley, and wanting to err on the side of caution. I am not aware of an actual case or interpretation whereby this issue has been settled. (Perhaps someone else can weigh in as well?).
As I understood it, this whole thing had to do with concerns over running afoul of revenue recognition when selling a product. If you sell something for its full price up front, but provide some 'free' accessory or service further down the road that substantially enhances the functionality of the original purchase, the question is whether the seller should have waited to recognize a part of the revenue until this new functionality was introduced.
One way to forestall any potential problem is to simply charge for the new accessory or service.
The whole thing seems to have been driven by CFOs running scared of gray areas in Sarbanes-Oxley, and wanting to err on the side of caution. I am not aware of an actual case or interpretation whereby this issue has been settled. (Perhaps someone else can weigh in as well?).
So why the hell does this not apply for mobile devices, which all get free updates? What is it that differentiates them? I believe if Apple wanted to release the next OSX for free, they would. There's no reason 10.9 should cost money and iOS7 should not.
I moved to Florida four years ago and soon found that I couldn't rely on my TomTom GPS to find many of the houses I was looking at. On-line mapping services like Google, Bing and MapQuest weren't any better. I conclude from these problems that real estate developers changed the street names after the mapping services got their data.
I've reported the incorrect street name for my current address several times, but the iOS map app still gets it wrong. While I sympathize with the desire to cross-check for accuracy, there should be a provision for adding explanatory information (perhaps a photo of the street sign) so my word will be given proper weight compared to inaccurate on-line databases. I'm glad to see the beta software for Apple Maps on Mavericks has that feature; the iOS map app needs it too.
So why the hell does this not apply for mobile devices, which all get free updates? What is it that differentiates them? I believe if Apple wanted to release the next OSX for free, they would. There's no reason 10.9 should cost money and iOS7 should not.
I believe they used a subscription type of accounting where the revenue isn't totally recognized at the time of sale. But I know they changed it, and now things like ATV and iPod touches get free updates.
The whole thing is stupid. I can understand if Apple pulled a Motorola and said "buy our product now, and in 4 months we'll activate Feature X"... Then it could get shady. But a free update should be allowable as just goodwill.
Wanna know a way that'll pretty much guarantee to get Maps on the desktop of every Mac bought in the past 5 years? 1. Included it as a default app in Mavericks. Check! 2. Make Mavericks a free download. Check?
I think if Apple has any sense they'll release Mavericks for free. 1. They'll get everyone to install it. 2. It'll make the whole platform stronger. 3. It'll make Mac developers job far more streamlined, enticing, and easy. 4. It'll make buying a Mac more appealing: 'you mean to say I'll get cool new features and technologies and a new OS every year, for free!? Here's my credit card'. 5. It's good karma; it's good business.
Here's the year where Apple can make history. Let's do it!
In conclusion: of the people I know locally who have Macs, none of them have Mountain Lion installed. Yes: none of them. By making Mavericks free I can guarantee Apple that everyone I personally know will install it. Everyone I know with a Mac will be on Macericks. That's the bottom line. And that will apply to practically everyone everyone knows who has a Mac. That's the point! That's why 96% of iPhone users are on iOS 6: because it's free. And from that point on the same will apply to OS X. And that'll be a great thing!
Yes my hope, however a $20 last year might mean a $10 this year(hoping) and $5 next year, and free or $1 so forth.
It would be nice to have the reporting in OS X with bigger screen. However, I never had any problem in reporting from my iPhone. The problem is, no report was ever (again, ever) corrected. I reported 3 incidents the day Maps were available and all 3 errors still exists. It appears from the thread that the correction is painfully slow or outright non-existent. I dont care if the partners (Yelp, Tom Tom) were lazy or Google Maps takes similar time to correct. The service is from Apple and I expect a quality product from Apple. We will not blame Foxconn because they assembled the iPhone 5 the wrong way, will we? We will blame Apple for lack of Quality Control.
My personal feeling is Apple should invest heavily now in improving Maps. Time is running out. At this rate, by the time got the Maps data corrected, others will have much better features, services etc. Apple can improve their Maps through carefull crowd sourcing by engaging volunteers. I know several people from my surroundings who will gladly do much of data entry, data correction free of cost with a small recognition. I know many of us will do it. So, why not utilize them. Why wait for the lazy (?) partners or professional (!) to do the job very slowly.
But another clear intent of putting Maps on the Mac involves leveraging lots of eyeballs to identify and report errors, something Apple has made easier to discover and do on the Mac when compared to smaller-screened mobile devices.
Apple has always included a way to "<a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/25/inside_ios_6_whats_wrong_with_apples_new_maps/page/2">report a problem</a>" in iOS 6 Maps, but because it does so in the context of Yelp local search information, it's not readily obvious that this button is for reporting map errors rather than just filing a grievance against a business or Yelp's data (below).
It looks exactly the same on Mavericks, except More info on yelp does not look like an actual button as above (It's just the text but it still is a button).
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
I personally have half of my clients upgraded, whereas the other half actually can't upgrade on many of their production machines due to outdated software still in use. Also, some of that software, like FreeHand, will never be updated because it's EOLed by Adobe and Adobe has taken away the ability in CS6 or CC to open FH files in Illustrator. Those clients just can't afford to throw away 20+ years worth of files and easy access to them.
Those clients and machines that aren't in the above situation have all been updated to ML (skipped Lion).... and they all enjoy it.
Clients? I'm talking about regular home users. I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Quote:
Originally Posted by DipDog3
If any of the problems I have submitted ever get fixed, I'll let you know.
I can say the same thing about mapquest and google maps. Been reporting errors with them for years and most of them have never been fixed
So darned what?!
We're talking about Apple, not Google or MapQuest. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that 'report a problem' is moot. In which case, this whole thread -- including your post -- is completely pointless, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
1. They verify every report to make sure no one is pranking
2. If you are reporting a telephone number issue then you prosbby need to report that to Yelp directly (the button in question is likely for map errors only).
At the yelp website I can't enter luxembourg as country ?
Submitting the error to yelp should therefore be a problem :-)
In Yelp most of the world doesn't even exist :-)
http://www.yelp.com/locations
The sad fact is that the majority of people do not pay for software updates, as they do not understand the benefits. Just make it free and get it over with.
In fairness to the people arguing against the apple integrated TV one must point out that to date apple hasn't released an integrated TV.
The current Apple TV isn't being upgraded every two years because its been around for quite a while now and we are still only on gen 3. There simply isn't new hardware to upgrade to after two years.
I still think that the number of people unwilling to upgrade is minuscule. $20/year for amazing new features is already a pretty sweet deal.
I've heard this, but I've never seen the actual law or rationale behind it. Anyone care to weigh in?
How long does it take to fix reported problems? A grocery store near me is marked almost a mile from where it actually is.
I've reported it twice in the last three months.
It isn't quite as simple as that... There are many areas of the world that are sensitive politically, militarily, nationally... Apple getting virtual 3D Flyover [mapping] of Paris is a real coup -- you cannot actually fly over that area without prior approval to a very restricted/limited route and time.
By comparison, Google maps/earth 3D Flyover of Paris is primitive.
I see you live in Montreal... I've never been there, but it looks good in 3D.
I did a search for poutine (ah, poutine...) and got 8 hits near the downtown area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DipDog3
If any of the problems I have submitted ever get fixed, I'll let you know.
I submitted a change for an elementary school location on two occasions. It took about 60 days for it to be corrected on maps. This has been my only experience so far.
Sorry... my clients as an Apple and print consultant here in Germany.
However... all of the home users (or people that don't need certain software that used Rosetta) that * I * know, have upgraded to ML. Some happen to be clients as well.
Actually, I also agree with this idea.
It's something Apple could do to make it really, really hurt in certain male regions for the guys up North pushing Blue Doorways...:smokey:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
I've heard this, but I've never seen the actual law or rationale behind it. Anyone care to weigh in?
As I understood it, this whole thing had to do with concerns over running afoul of revenue recognition when selling a product. If you sell something for its full price up front, but provide some 'free' accessory or service further down the road that substantially enhances the functionality of the original purchase, the question is whether the seller should have waited to recognize a part of the revenue until this new functionality was introduced.
One way to forestall any potential problem is to simply charge for the new accessory or service.
The whole thing seems to have been driven by CFOs running scared of gray areas in Sarbanes-Oxley, and wanting to err on the side of caution. I am not aware of an actual case or interpretation whereby this issue has been settled. (Perhaps someone else can weigh in as well?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
As I understood it, this whole thing had to do with concerns over running afoul of revenue recognition when selling a product. If you sell something for its full price up front, but provide some 'free' accessory or service further down the road that substantially enhances the functionality of the original purchase, the question is whether the seller should have waited to recognize a part of the revenue until this new functionality was introduced.
One way to forestall any potential problem is to simply charge for the new accessory or service.
The whole thing seems to have been driven by CFOs running scared of gray areas in Sarbanes-Oxley, and wanting to err on the side of caution. I am not aware of an actual case or interpretation whereby this issue has been settled. (Perhaps someone else can weigh in as well?).
So why the hell does this not apply for mobile devices, which all get free updates? What is it that differentiates them? I believe if Apple wanted to release the next OSX for free, they would. There's no reason 10.9 should cost money and iOS7 should not.
I've reported the incorrect street name for my current address several times, but the iOS map app still gets it wrong. While I sympathize with the desire to cross-check for accuracy, there should be a provision for adding explanatory information (perhaps a photo of the street sign) so my word will be given proper weight compared to inaccurate on-line databases. I'm glad to see the beta software for Apple Maps on Mavericks has that feature; the iOS map app needs it too.
I believe they used a subscription type of accounting where the revenue isn't totally recognized at the time of sale. But I know they changed it, and now things like ATV and iPod touches get free updates.
The whole thing is stupid. I can understand if Apple pulled a Motorola and said "buy our product now, and in 4 months we'll activate Feature X"... Then it could get shady. But a free update should be allowable as just goodwill.
I think that you would be really interested in some recent research that I have come across about crowds and citizen science.%u200B %u200B
It%u2019s called %u201CThe Theory of Crowd Capital%u201D and you can download it here if you%u2019re interested: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2193115
Really powerful stuff!
My personal feeling is Apple should invest heavily now in improving Maps. Time is running out. At this rate, by the time got the Maps data corrected, others will have much better features, services etc. Apple can improve their Maps through carefull crowd sourcing by engaging volunteers. I know several people from my surroundings who will gladly do much of data entry, data correction free of cost with a small recognition. I know many of us will do it. So, why not utilize them. Why wait for the lazy (?) partners or professional (!) to do the job very slowly.