I think turn-by-turn (assisted) GPS is sooooo basic these days that it should have been fully working on iPhone.
I only wan't to buy a 3G if the gps is fully working and not lagging (seconds) and not depends of any internet connection to get the google-maps ! Then I can throw away the tom-tom-thing away and live my life with only 1 device in my pocket, the iPhone (replacing 3 devices, being: ipod, phone and gps) with the added functionality that applications give me (almost giving my an extra gaming console in my pocket too)... just my idea :-)
On other handsets GPS navigation is supplied by third party software. And the software is generally shit.
Hopefully Tom Tom will release an iPhone app that will let you store your maps in memory like the winmo version does.
Why Tom Tom? I like sticking the Ozzy voice over on... 'at the r..r..r..oundabout take the f..f..f..irst f..f..f..fuckin exit' by the time he is finished you missed your exit. LOL
Isn't this kind of a diversion or unnecessary hair splitting from the perspective of this discussion? I ask this because all the GPS units I've seen lately have a turn-by-turn navigation feature anyway, it's assumed to be a feature that's expected of GPS devices now. From a technical perspective, you're right, but from a consumer perspective, it's missing a very basic feature, I don't think anyone sets out to buy a GPS only to get one that doesn't have dynamic turn-by-turn. These days, it's almost like getting raisin bran without the raisins and still calling it raisin bran.
You're right, I am just being pedantic, but that's because I use GPS units that aren't meant for cars, and therefore see the majority of GPS units as not being SatNavs. I sail and walk and use GPS for both, neither of which that I use have maps, and only give a longitude and latitude. For me, that's the biggest missing feature of the GPS that comes with the iPhone. Thankfully, 3rd parties have fixed that one.
As for SatNavs, I'm going to keep my standalone Garmin. One, because Garmin are much more established than TomTom with better accuracy and often a faster location, and two, TomToms in Britain are pretty hopeless with post codes (our equivalent of zip codes, but they go litterally down to a few houses, or if you're in the sticks, one house, rather than the larger areas a zip code covers). Friends with TomToms have been left in the middle of a field up to 50 miles from their destination.
That's not a good definition for a GPS. Most GPS's on the market for handheld use don't do that either. Neither do most phones that include GPS.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
Google has insisted on a primarily open-source approach that takes its hands off of much of the development process; developers can not only share code but are even allowed to access components that would normally be off-limits, such as the phone dialer.
You can dial the phone both from the web and from iPhone applications.
Yes, Apple needs to resolve the opportunities for open source development on the iPhone.
Their are over 3000 native apps and 2500 web apps available to the iPhone and iTouch. What do you feel is missing?
Real applications that can turn the iPhone into a real PDA, like the rest of the competition :
- a decent Agenda with professional features - like Agenda Fusion on WM
- a real GPS like TomTom on WM
- less torchlight and todo and tip calculators
- and AppStore that you can navigate through without going through hundreds of useless applications
Quote:
What do you define as GPS?
Something that you can actually use to go through point A to point B safely :
- it should understand the difference between a car, a bike and walking - meaning it won't try to make me walk through highways, avoir crossing through parks when I walk or make the respect one-way streets while I'm on my feet
- it should be able to reroute on the fly if I missed a step or changed my mind
- it should be able to use voice to guide me
- it should be linked with the traffic data to calculate the best route
- where is the 3D view?
Look at what TomTom does. That's what a GPS application should look like.
The difference is that Apple is both the software and the hardware vender. Apple needs their handset approved by the cell networks. Google doesn't have that concern. They just build the sandbox and it's up to the hardware makers to screw it up with a salad of GUI approaches and no integration to speak of.
Only on an Apple forum would you see so many people bashing another competitor entering the field while at the same time patting Apple on the back for the iPhone.
Sheesh, competition is a GOOD thing. I'd probably never buy an Android-based phone (I have my eye on an iPhone 3G), but I'll be damned if it won't be a good thing for the industry as a whole.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
If they Apple does, they're probably mostly bogus and easily challengeable in court. Multitouch input is old news, and considerably predates the iPhone. The only things I can easily imagine Apple having a legitimate patent to is some specific hardware mechanism for or possibly related algorithms to capturing the input (neither of which I think they've applied for, at least not from any patents I've seen mentioned on this site).
This cracks me up...because best case scenario for Android is that EVERYBODY adopts it...and then everybody is the same except iPhone...built in market differentiation. It's funny to me that existing cell phone manufacturers would actually adopt something that would make them lowest common denominator with their competitors. Good idea from Google, but ultimately bad for cell phone manufacturers and bad for consumers.
This cracks me up...because best case scenario for Android is that EVERYBODY adopts it...and then everybody is the same except iPhone...built in market differentiation. It's funny to me that existing cell phone manufacturers would actually adopt something that would make them lowest common denominator with their competitors. Good idea from Google, but ultimately bad for cell phone manufacturers and bad for consumers.
WOW, take a BEST case scenario which is nearly IMPOSSIBLE then use it as the main basis behind your thought that Android is bad for consumers.
Are you THAT misguided? What makes you think that Google's OS is going to take over the ENTIRE [non-iPhone] cell phone market? AFAIK, nearly every handset maker has its own custom OS for its phones, then you have companies like Microsoft which provides a base OS for use on any number of phone platforms. That is what Google is providing.
Google is basically doing the same thing that Microsoft is doing, and look at the marketshare that Microsoft has in the phone OS market -- it's nowhere near even 90%. There is room for both Microsoft, Google, and everyone else in the market.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
I don't know what planet YOU'RE on, but I haven't seen a single post saying Google should get out of the business. Nobody I read, is saying competition is bad. Most here welcome good competition.
Don't mistake the glee that comes from realizing just how bad the competition is..... with a desire that there was no competition!
The first implementation of Android will be pathetic.
So what?
Get over it.
The first phone Apple was involved in was pathetic.
Didn't mean they gave up, and Google won't and neither will the carriers that AT&T shut out of the U.S. market.
I don't think we have a problem with competition, just don't get mad at US if we enjoy reviewing just how bad their early stuff is.
WOW, take a BEST case scenario which is nearly IMPOSSIBLE then use it as the main basis behind your thought that Android is bad for consumers.
I think if you think about is, you'll note in the discussion that is was a bad idea for the cell companies..... and it is a REALLY BAD idea for them. And as for consumers, not sure a major selling point is going to be it's a least common denom. I would point out Windows Mobile has a claim at widest developer potential and THAT hasn't been a hot thing for consumers. (apparently)
Everyone should keep their eye on the ball.
Android is in competition with Windows, not the iPhone.
If the hackers do what I think they're going to do, it wouldn't surprise me to see android running on an iPhone.....
I don't know what planet YOU'RE on, but I haven't seen a single post saying Google should get out of the business. Nobody I read, is saying competition is bad. Most here welcome good competition.
Don't mistake the glee that comes from realizing just how bad the competition is..... with a desire that there was no competition!
The first implementation of Android will be pathetic.
So what?
Get over it.
The first phone Apple was involved in was pathetic.
Didn't mean they gave up, and Google won't and neither will the carriers that AT&T shut out of the U.S. market.
I don't think we have a problem with competition, just don't get mad at US if we enjoy reviewing just how bad their early stuff is.
The Android-based phone hasn't been released yet, so how can you say that it will be pathetic? Jump the gun much?
Only on an Apple forum would you see so many people bashing another competitor entering the field while at the same time patting Apple on the back for the iPhone.
Sheesh, competition is a GOOD thing. I'd probably never buy an Android-based phone (I have my eye on an iPhone 3G), but I'll be damned if it won't be a good thing for the industry as a whole.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
Nice straw man post that only indicates you haven't been reading the thread.
There were 47 posts prior to yours (including the original posted article), and not until the very last one was there an explicit "bashing" of "another competitor". Another 3, maybe 4 posts (including mine) expressing some mild skepticism about the prospects of an immediate Android homerun. But just about everyone here has been welcoming competition or at least had some curiosity about Android, while debating some features of the iPhone and how successful it has or hasn't been.
Doesn't look like a display of "Apple blinders" or people not "welcoming competition" in this thread, but hey, your own blinders might need some adjustment.
They need to kill the NDA nonsense and let developers collaborate amongst each other.
You have to frigg'n kidding. We don't collaborate amongst each other now on any platform.
[QUOTE=winterspan;1309828They also need to better organize the app store to separate great apps from the crapware and lay out an explicit and comprehensive guide for accepting their policies on accepting and rejecting applications to the App store.[/QUOTE]
So far the, what 2 or 3 apps that have been denied did not comply with the iPhone SDK License that they signed and agreed upon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan
If they continue to treat developers poorly, many of them will move to other platforms, especially if Android takes off.
Not on your life. Except for a couple of developers, there is no hint that developers are being treated poorly or any evidence of a mass movement otherwise is forthcoming. In fact, it is growing. If you were at the last Developer Conference or read any of the news that came from it, it was obvious that the doubled attendance and their exuberance this year, that they were not being denied or hindered by Apples guidelines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan
As much as I like Google, I love the iPhone and believe mobile OSX is the best platform from a technical and aesthetic standpoint -- Apple just needs to get the heck out of the way and let the developer community do what they do best. I certainly DON'T WANT to see good developers and software companies get discouraged with Apple and have Android leapfrog Apple in popularity and marketshare. We all know exactly what that would look like and the consequences of that. It would be another round of the 1980's-1990's crappy/knock-off but mass market and cheap "Windows PC" vs expensive closed-system Apple Macs.
So Apple continues to grow and develop amazing products with a closed system that is arguably less expensive vs. the IBMs', Dells', Gateways', etc., who have closed shop or on the verge of going out of business with their so-called open-door policy.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
So half the cell phones now have "turn-by-turn navigation."
Isn't this kind of a diversion or unnecessary hair splitting from the perspective of this discussion? I ask this because all the GPS units I've seen lately have a turn-by-turn navigation feature anyway, it's assumed to be a feature that's expected of GPS devices now. From a technical perspective, you're right, but from a consumer perspective, it's missing a very basic feature, I don't think anyone sets out to buy a GPS only to get one that doesn't have dynamic turn-by-turn. These days, it's almost like getting raisin bran without the raisins and still calling it raisin bran.
I don't think the general public has that much expectation from GPS and turn by turn navigation.
One reason is because most of us spend 80% of our time in our home area. Where you are more familiar and navigation is less necessary.
Another is that mobile carriers typically charge an extra monthly fee on navigation services for the phone. Few people find it that valuable of a service to pay monthly for. I think that stifles the adoption of navigation into the wider market.
Most of the people I know with iPhone rarely use GPS. Of course we are in NYC. I've seen people think of it as a cute toy, with the blue dot indicating where you are on a map. But so far I haven't seen many people depending on turn by turn as a serious tool.
I think this will eventually change though. Especially when navigation is an app that you pay for once and not an additional monthly fee.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
I believe what Mel was saying is that not every GPS device has navigation. If you simply need to find coordinates their is no reason to have turn by turn directions. Which is what many GPS devices do.
The difference in the US is that for most carriers we don't have the option of downloading your choice of navigation software. You have to pay the carrier for its proprietary navigation services.
Comments
A-GPS maybe ?
I think turn-by-turn (assisted) GPS is sooooo basic these days that it should have been fully working on iPhone.
I only wan't to buy a 3G if the gps is fully working and not lagging (seconds) and not depends of any internet connection to get the google-maps ! Then I can throw away the tom-tom-thing away and live my life with only 1 device in my pocket, the iPhone (replacing 3 devices, being: ipod, phone and gps) with the added functionality that applications give me (almost giving my an extra gaming console in my pocket too)... just my idea :-)
On other handsets GPS navigation is supplied by third party software. And the software is generally shit.
Hopefully Tom Tom will release an iPhone app that will let you store your maps in memory like the winmo version does.
Why Tom Tom? I like sticking the Ozzy voice over on... 'at the r..r..r..oundabout take the f..f..f..irst f..f..f..fuckin exit' by the time he is finished you missed your exit. LOL
Isn't this kind of a diversion or unnecessary hair splitting from the perspective of this discussion? I ask this because all the GPS units I've seen lately have a turn-by-turn navigation feature anyway, it's assumed to be a feature that's expected of GPS devices now. From a technical perspective, you're right, but from a consumer perspective, it's missing a very basic feature, I don't think anyone sets out to buy a GPS only to get one that doesn't have dynamic turn-by-turn. These days, it's almost like getting raisin bran without the raisins and still calling it raisin bran.
You're right, I am just being pedantic, but that's because I use GPS units that aren't meant for cars, and therefore see the majority of GPS units as not being SatNavs. I sail and walk and use GPS for both, neither of which that I use have maps, and only give a longitude and latitude. For me, that's the biggest missing feature of the GPS that comes with the iPhone. Thankfully, 3rd parties have fixed that one.
As for SatNavs, I'm going to keep my standalone Garmin. One, because Garmin are much more established than TomTom with better accuracy and often a faster location, and two, TomToms in Britain are pretty hopeless with post codes (our equivalent of zip codes, but they go litterally down to a few houses, or if you're in the sticks, one house, rather than the larger areas a zip code covers). Friends with TomToms have been left in the middle of a field up to 50 miles from their destination.
That's not a good definition for a GPS. Most GPS's on the market for handheld use don't do that either. Neither do most phones that include GPS.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
Google has insisted on a primarily open-source approach that takes its hands off of much of the development process; developers can not only share code but are even allowed to access components that would normally be off-limits, such as the phone dialer.
You can dial the phone both from the web and from iPhone applications.
Yes, Apple needs to resolve the opportunities for open source development on the iPhone.
Their are over 3000 native apps and 2500 web apps available to the iPhone and iTouch. What do you feel is missing?
Real applications that can turn the iPhone into a real PDA, like the rest of the competition :
- a decent Agenda with professional features - like Agenda Fusion on WM
- a real GPS like TomTom on WM
- less torchlight and todo and tip calculators
- and AppStore that you can navigate through without going through hundreds of useless applications
What do you define as GPS?
Something that you can actually use to go through point A to point B safely :
- it should understand the difference between a car, a bike and walking - meaning it won't try to make me walk through highways, avoir crossing through parks when I walk or make the respect one-way streets while I'm on my feet
- it should be able to reroute on the fly if I missed a step or changed my mind
- it should be able to use voice to guide me
- it should be linked with the traffic data to calculate the best route
- where is the 3D view?
Look at what TomTom does. That's what a GPS application should look like.
The difference is that Apple is both the software and the hardware vender. Apple needs their handset approved by the cell networks. Google doesn't have that concern. They just build the sandbox and it's up to the hardware makers to screw it up with a salad of GUI approaches and no integration to speak of.
fixed.
Android is just a bad iphone clone.
Sheesh, competition is a GOOD thing. I'd probably never buy an Android-based phone (I have my eye on an iPhone 3G), but I'll be damned if it won't be a good thing for the industry as a whole.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
Shame Apple has the patents for multitouch.
If they Apple does, they're probably mostly bogus and easily challengeable in court. Multitouch input is old news, and considerably predates the iPhone. The only things I can easily imagine Apple having a legitimate patent to is some specific hardware mechanism for or possibly related algorithms to capturing the input (neither of which I think they've applied for, at least not from any patents I've seen mentioned on this site).
This cracks me up...because best case scenario for Android is that EVERYBODY adopts it...and then everybody is the same except iPhone...built in market differentiation. It's funny to me that existing cell phone manufacturers would actually adopt something that would make them lowest common denominator with their competitors. Good idea from Google, but ultimately bad for cell phone manufacturers and bad for consumers.
WOW, take a BEST case scenario which is nearly IMPOSSIBLE then use it as the main basis behind your thought that Android is bad for consumers.
Are you THAT misguided? What makes you think that Google's OS is going to take over the ENTIRE [non-iPhone] cell phone market? AFAIK, nearly every handset maker has its own custom OS for its phones, then you have companies like Microsoft which provides a base OS for use on any number of phone platforms. That is what Google is providing.
Google is basically doing the same thing that Microsoft is doing, and look at the marketshare that Microsoft has in the phone OS market -- it's nowhere near even 90%. There is room for both Microsoft, Google, and everyone else in the market.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
I don't know what planet YOU'RE on, but I haven't seen a single post saying Google should get out of the business. Nobody I read, is saying competition is bad. Most here welcome good competition.
Don't mistake the glee that comes from realizing just how bad the competition is..... with a desire that there was no competition!
The first implementation of Android will be pathetic.
So what?
Get over it.
The first phone Apple was involved in was pathetic.
Didn't mean they gave up, and Google won't and neither will the carriers that AT&T shut out of the U.S. market.
I don't think we have a problem with competition, just don't get mad at US if we enjoy reviewing just how bad their early stuff is.
WOW, take a BEST case scenario which is nearly IMPOSSIBLE then use it as the main basis behind your thought that Android is bad for consumers.
I think if you think about is, you'll note in the discussion that is was a bad idea for the cell companies..... and it is a REALLY BAD idea for them. And as for consumers, not sure a major selling point is going to be it's a least common denom. I would point out Windows Mobile has a claim at widest developer potential and THAT hasn't been a hot thing for consumers. (apparently)
Everyone should keep their eye on the ball.
Android is in competition with Windows, not the iPhone.
If the hackers do what I think they're going to do, it wouldn't surprise me to see android running on an iPhone.....
I don't know what planet YOU'RE on, but I haven't seen a single post saying Google should get out of the business. Nobody I read, is saying competition is bad. Most here welcome good competition.
Don't mistake the glee that comes from realizing just how bad the competition is..... with a desire that there was no competition!
The first implementation of Android will be pathetic.
So what?
Get over it.
The first phone Apple was involved in was pathetic.
Didn't mean they gave up, and Google won't and neither will the carriers that AT&T shut out of the U.S. market.
I don't think we have a problem with competition, just don't get mad at US if we enjoy reviewing just how bad their early stuff is.
The Android-based phone hasn't been released yet, so how can you say that it will be pathetic? Jump the gun much?
Only on an Apple forum would you see so many people bashing another competitor entering the field while at the same time patting Apple on the back for the iPhone.
Sheesh, competition is a GOOD thing. I'd probably never buy an Android-based phone (I have my eye on an iPhone 3G), but I'll be damned if it won't be a good thing for the industry as a whole.
Why can't you people take off the Apple blinders for once and at least welcome competition?
Nice straw man post that only indicates you haven't been reading the thread.
There were 47 posts prior to yours (including the original posted article), and not until the very last one was there an explicit "bashing" of "another competitor". Another 3, maybe 4 posts (including mine) expressing some mild skepticism about the prospects of an immediate Android homerun. But just about everyone here has been welcoming competition or at least had some curiosity about Android, while debating some features of the iPhone and how successful it has or hasn't been.
Doesn't look like a display of "Apple blinders" or people not "welcoming competition" in this thread, but hey, your own blinders might need some adjustment.
They need to kill the NDA nonsense and let developers collaborate amongst each other.
You have to frigg'n kidding. We don't collaborate amongst each other now on any platform.
[QUOTE=winterspan;1309828They also need to better organize the app store to separate great apps from the crapware and lay out an explicit and comprehensive guide for accepting their policies on accepting and rejecting applications to the App store.[/QUOTE]
So far the, what 2 or 3 apps that have been denied did not comply with the iPhone SDK License that they signed and agreed upon.
If they continue to treat developers poorly, many of them will move to other platforms, especially if Android takes off.
Not on your life. Except for a couple of developers, there is no hint that developers are being treated poorly or any evidence of a mass movement otherwise is forthcoming. In fact, it is growing. If you were at the last Developer Conference or read any of the news that came from it, it was obvious that the doubled attendance and their exuberance this year, that they were not being denied or hindered by Apples guidelines.
As much as I like Google, I love the iPhone and believe mobile OSX is the best platform from a technical and aesthetic standpoint -- Apple just needs to get the heck out of the way and let the developer community do what they do best. I certainly DON'T WANT to see good developers and software companies get discouraged with Apple and have Android leapfrog Apple in popularity and marketshare. We all know exactly what that would look like and the consequences of that. It would be another round of the 1980's-1990's crappy/knock-off but mass market and cheap "Windows PC" vs expensive closed-system Apple Macs.
So Apple continues to grow and develop amazing products with a closed system that is arguably less expensive vs. the IBMs', Dells', Gateways', etc., who have closed shop or on the verge of going out of business with their so-called open-door policy.
The Android-based phone hasn't been released yet, so how can you say that it will be pathetic? Jump the gun much?
You watch the video? Guess not.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
So half the cell phones now have "turn-by-turn navigation."
Please provide list and links. Thank you.
So half the cell phones now have "turn-by-turn navigation."
Please provide list and links. Thank you.
Garmin XT (supports Windows Mobile, S60 and Blackberry)
TomTom Mobile (supports Windows Mobile, S60 and UIQ)
Those two pieces of software support for 99% of the phones I've seen with integrated GPS in the UK.
Isn't this kind of a diversion or unnecessary hair splitting from the perspective of this discussion? I ask this because all the GPS units I've seen lately have a turn-by-turn navigation feature anyway, it's assumed to be a feature that's expected of GPS devices now. From a technical perspective, you're right, but from a consumer perspective, it's missing a very basic feature, I don't think anyone sets out to buy a GPS only to get one that doesn't have dynamic turn-by-turn. These days, it's almost like getting raisin bran without the raisins and still calling it raisin bran.
I don't think the general public has that much expectation from GPS and turn by turn navigation.
One reason is because most of us spend 80% of our time in our home area. Where you are more familiar and navigation is less necessary.
Another is that mobile carriers typically charge an extra monthly fee on navigation services for the phone. Few people find it that valuable of a service to pay monthly for. I think that stifles the adoption of navigation into the wider market.
Most of the people I know with iPhone rarely use GPS. Of course we are in NYC. I've seen people think of it as a cute toy, with the blue dot indicating where you are on a map. But so far I haven't seen many people depending on turn by turn as a serious tool.
I think this will eventually change though. Especially when navigation is an app that you pay for once and not an additional monthly fee.
Oh really? Every other GPS phone I've seen has the ability to do turn-by-turn navigation, whether the phone is based on Windows Mobile, Symbian or Blackberry OS.
I believe what Mel was saying is that not every GPS device has navigation. If you simply need to find coordinates their is no reason to have turn by turn directions. Which is what many GPS devices do.
The difference in the US is that for most carriers we don't have the option of downloading your choice of navigation software. You have to pay the carrier for its proprietary navigation services.