problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
Give them a break. They're all feeling pretty battered and bruised over the Samsung trial, so they need to troll over nonsensical issues in order to try to make themselves feel better.
I usually love AppleInsider articles but this one smells bad, especially after reading the comments from Android users explaining that their maps have been vector for a few years now.
I hope AppleInsider corrects their errors.
Not actually "a few years now" however.
As recently as a few months ago, Google maps on the web still required flash and was pixel based. Also the article pointed to by the Android defenders is from the very end of 2010 and talks about moving to vector as a process that's going to be taking place, not a "done deal."
So in fact, Android and Google maps in general have only just implemented vector graphics and may not even be completely free of pixels yet. Google typically doesn't just shift everything to one side and present something new like Apple does. They often take years to transition their technology from one thing to another. I don't have any inside information, but I would not be surprised at all to find out that their Android maps use vector in some places or layers and still use pixelated images in others.
Also, to all the complainers ... yes, this article appears to be wrong about vector mapping on Android maps. This doesn't equate to "this article is all liiieeess!!!!" or "AppleInsider always lies!" etc. etc.
I think it would be great if Apple made a web version available if only because the web version of Google maps is atrocious and almost impossible to use. But the real problem here is that you are trying to use three tools when only one is necessary. It's like watching the same show on three TV sets lined up side by side and complaining that they get out of sync because the commercial breaks are timed differently on each.
One thing I was scratching my head about was how Apple was going to deal with sharing a route with non-iOS users when there mapping is only for iOS users.
It turns out, if you share a route with someone you can send it as an iMessage, SMS, email, etc. and it comes through more like a vCard but it also contains a link to http://maps.apple.com/ but there is no such site for Apple. Right now it redirects to Google Maps website, at least if you click the link on a Mac in any browser. (I apologize if that was covered in the article, I stopped after the first page)
Do you think Apple will create their own maps website? I can't think of a good reason for them not to.
problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
Perhaps you were less than clear on that in the article itself, which makes it an issue created by the author. It's some number of paragraphs in before there's any hint that you're only referring to Google maps as they exist on iOS and not in general. Even then the inference is that Apple has created a new way of rendering maps, leading casual readers to believe Google Maps are natively raster unlike Apple's.
If you aren't trying to be misleading and simply were inadvertently unclear, perhaps it would be appropriate to clarify what's being compared within the first paragraph of the article. It would certainly help avoid a misreading, evident by the numerous comments by Apple fans and foes alike that the article is wrong.
problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
I guess you missed the part where I said I am a former Android user and now happily own an iPhone 4S. I am not a fandroid by any stretch of the imagination. So calm down DED, take a deep breath and relax. You really don't handle constructive criticism very well. And why even pick my post to assault? There were a dozen more posts far more detailed and critical.
Indeed. AI really dropped the ball on this article. Android having had Vector based maps FOR TWO YEARS very much makes the focal theme of this article change from "iOS beats google with new maps" to "iOS finally catches up to Google maps"
Do you think Apple will create their own maps website? I can't think of a good reason for them not to.
I think the main reason we won't see this soon is engineering resources. Apple will want to be focusing their energies on the iOS implementation, not worrying about a web variant.
That said, if Apple Maps is ever truly going to be competitive with Google, expanding the scope beyond iOS may be necessary. For one thing, more and more maps data is crowd sourced these days. Check out Google's MapMaker: it's hard to imagine Apple keeping their maps up-to-date without something like that.
I think the main reason we won't see this soon is engineering resources. Apple will want to be focusing their energies on the iOS implementation, not worrying about a web variant.
That said, if Apple Maps is ever truly going to be competitive with Google, expanding the scope beyond iOS may be necessary. More and more maps data is crowd sourced these days. Check out Google's MapMaker: it's hard to imagine Apple keeping their maps up-to-date without something like that.
You're probably right but I will certainly don't want to hear that.
Looks great. The big question is, will the map of every country be available upon release or am I going to have to wait a year or more before the service becomes available in my country...like most other Apple's recent services.
Looks great. The big question is, will the map of every country be available upon release or am I going to have to wait a year or more before the service becomes available in my country...like most other Apple's recent services.
It seems to have pretty good worldwide coverage, at least as far as basic road layout goes. I tried a few obscure/remote places, and North Korea is the only country I could find where roads are obviously missing.
Quality and comprehensiveness when it comes to features other than just roads is another issue, however. IMO, its way behind Google for that.
Indeed. AI really dropped the ball on this article. Android having had Vector based maps FOR TWO YEARS very much makes the focal theme of this article change from "iOS beats google with new maps" to "iOS finally catches up to Google maps"
That's not entirely true, either.
"Apple Maps surpasses Google on iOS" would be accurate.
"Apple Maps on iOS catches up to Google Maps on Android" would also be accurate.
But the way you described it, it sounds as if Google offers vector maps on iOS, as well as on Android.
Agreed. I am a former Android user and now iPhone 4S user and the vector news was pretty well known. It is hard to believe they could make such a huge and well-known mistake by accident. Google maps on Android is a very good product and sets the bar very high for Apple which is a good thing. I hope they can get a map app on iOS that can compete well, but no reason to lie about it to make it look more advanced or unique when that has been around for several years on the Google version. Just makes AI look bad and not Google maps.
problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
Fair enough, but the article was definitely misleading, even if unintentionally, so blaming poor comprehension skills is disingenuous. Towards the end it says:
Google is also working on its own next generation Google Maps that makes use of vectors, but it has a more difficult job because it is targeting several major platforms: the web, which relies upon the experimental new MapsGL enhancements of WebGL; Android, which has a native JavaME-like platform; and its existing public API, which is rooted in how Google Maps has worked in the past.
which, at least to me, clearly suggests that Google does not have vector-based maps on Android or any other platform. Nowhere, that I can see, does it mention that the comments about Google's data apply only to those data that iOS uses.
Another spectacular article D.E.D. Keep up the great work.
Re: "Even better, highly efficient vector maps allows Apple to load up a large area of maps you can continue to zoom into even after you've entered Airplane Mode."
And it would be easy to add a heuristic to maintain rendering performance, no matter what the zoom level is. In other words, as you zoom out, details below a certain point size could be ignored and not rendered. And as you zoom in, details that become bigger than the point size threshold would be rendered.
Starting in the 1980s, this kind of vector-based graphics allowed the low-powered processors of the time to draw things fast enough for interactive computer games. Asteroids, Star Wars, Battlezone, etc. all had that "wire frame" look, and were fast enough for compelling game play. Later, Adobe used vector-based graphics in their PostScript font technology and PDF page description language. All modern computing devices, more or less, now use vector-based fonts. Looking forward to seeing this technology in the Maps app.
"Apple Maps surpasses Google on iOS" would be accurate.
Since Maps.app is developed and maintained by Apple, this is really a case of Apple surpassing Apple. Google doesn't make the app, and their back end certainly hasn't been surpassed, as has been said many times over - they do vectors, and they have better data.
The article is very disingenuous as painting the lack of vector graphics in Maps.app as a Google problem.
Vector this, vector that. If it hasn't got streetview I'm not interested.
Yeah, real shame Apple abandoned QTVR. I wouldn't mind some higher resolution non-Flash (on OS X) street panoramas, especially if they're done with a single shot at a time so they don't have the stitching problems Streetview panoramas sometimes have.
Apple Maps is very 1.0 at the moment. The question for me is whether they will stick with it (in which case it could eventually be as good as Google's), or whether it's not an instant hit so they abandon it (e.g. Ping).
Comments
Give them a break. They're all feeling pretty battered and bruised over the Samsung trial, so they need to troll over nonsensical issues in order to try to make themselves feel better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill42
I usually love AppleInsider articles but this one smells bad, especially after reading the comments from Android users explaining that their maps have been vector for a few years now.
I hope AppleInsider corrects their errors.
Not actually "a few years now" however.
As recently as a few months ago, Google maps on the web still required flash and was pixel based. Also the article pointed to by the Android defenders is from the very end of 2010 and talks about moving to vector as a process that's going to be taking place, not a "done deal."
So in fact, Android and Google maps in general have only just implemented vector graphics and may not even be completely free of pixels yet. Google typically doesn't just shift everything to one side and present something new like Apple does. They often take years to transition their technology from one thing to another. I don't have any inside information, but I would not be surprised at all to find out that their Android maps use vector in some places or layers and still use pixelated images in others.
Also, to all the complainers ... yes, this article appears to be wrong about vector mapping on Android maps. This doesn't equate to "this article is all liiieeess!!!!" or "AppleInsider always lies!" etc. etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
There, I fixed it for you.
Wuh?
What is "Formula 1"? For that matter, what is "Speed Channel"?
One thing I was scratching my head about was how Apple was going to deal with sharing a route with non-iOS users when there mapping is only for iOS users.
It turns out, if you share a route with someone you can send it as an iMessage, SMS, email, etc. and it comes through more like a vCard but it also contains a link to http://maps.apple.com/ but there is no such site for Apple. Right now it redirects to Google Maps website, at least if you click the link on a Mac in any browser. (I apologize if that was covered in the article, I stopped after the first page)
Do you think Apple will create their own maps website? I can't think of a good reason for them not to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
Perhaps you were less than clear on that in the article itself, which makes it an issue created by the author. It's some number of paragraphs in before there's any hint that you're only referring to Google maps as they exist on iOS and not in general. Even then the inference is that Apple has created a new way of rendering maps, leading casual readers to believe Google Maps are natively raster unlike Apple's.
If you aren't trying to be misleading and simply were inadvertently unclear, perhaps it would be appropriate to clarify what's being compared within the first paragraph of the article. It would certainly help avoid a misreading, evident by the numerous comments by Apple fans and foes alike that the article is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
problem with your reading comprehension: this is AI, describing how Apple is changing iOS Maps to use its own new vector maps from the bitmapped maps currently obtained from Google. It's not a fanboy piece about how iOS is better than Android.
The article clearly states that Google has added a variety of features, including navigation, vectors and offline maps, to its own Android platform that Apple has opted not to support on its own iOS Maps app. It even quotes Google as hoping that Apple would use its new features.
So when you Android fanboys show up and start going into hysterics about how your phone has vector maps, it isn't relevant at all, because your experience is irrelevant to iOS users. You should be furiously posting how your phone is superior to your Android fan blogs so that your fan friends can read them and get excited about how they agree with you. iOS users don't care, because they're busy using their phone and Android software updates don't benefit them in that regard.
Do you guys get it yet, or do you need a number of additional comments to explain the situation to you?
I guess you missed the part where I said I am a former Android user and now happily own an iPhone 4S. I am not a fandroid by any stretch of the imagination. So calm down DED, take a deep breath and relax. You really don't handle constructive criticism very well. And why even pick my post to assault? There were a dozen more posts far more detailed and critical.
Indeed. AI really dropped the ball on this article. Android having had Vector based maps FOR TWO YEARS very much makes the focal theme of this article change from "iOS beats google with new maps" to "iOS finally catches up to Google maps"
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Do you think Apple will create their own maps website? I can't think of a good reason for them not to.
I think the main reason we won't see this soon is engineering resources. Apple will want to be focusing their energies on the iOS implementation, not worrying about a web variant.
That said, if Apple Maps is ever truly going to be competitive with Google, expanding the scope beyond iOS may be necessary. For one thing, more and more maps data is crowd sourced these days. Check out Google's MapMaker: it's hard to imagine Apple keeping their maps up-to-date without something like that.
You're probably right but I will certainly don't want to hear that.
Looks great. The big question is, will the map of every country be available upon release or am I going to have to wait a year or more before the service becomes available in my country...like most other Apple's recent services.
Quote:
Originally Posted by capoeira4u
Looks great. The big question is, will the map of every country be available upon release or am I going to have to wait a year or more before the service becomes available in my country...like most other Apple's recent services.
It seems to have pretty good worldwide coverage, at least as far as basic road layout goes. I tried a few obscure/remote places, and North Korea is the only country I could find where roads are obviously missing.
Quality and comprehensiveness when it comes to features other than just roads is another issue, however. IMO, its way behind Google for that.
That's not entirely true, either.
"Apple Maps surpasses Google on iOS" would be accurate.
"Apple Maps on iOS catches up to Google Maps on Android" would also be accurate.
But the way you described it, it sounds as if Google offers vector maps on iOS, as well as on Android.
Apple Maps is also outdated in curious ways. eg:
The town of Wanaka, New Zealand, was renamed over 70 years ago. Yet in Apple Maps it is shown with its old name?
Aldwych Tube station in London closed in the mid 1990s, yet is still shown in Apple Maps. It's not in the correct place, either!
Fair enough, but the article was definitely misleading, even if unintentionally, so blaming poor comprehension skills is disingenuous. Towards the end it says:
which, at least to me, clearly suggests that Google does not have vector-based maps on Android or any other platform. Nowhere, that I can see, does it mention that the comments about Google's data apply only to those data that iOS uses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's not entirely true, either.
"Apple Maps surpasses Google on iOS" would be accurate.
"Apple Maps on iOS catches up to Google Maps on Android" would also be accurate.
But the way you described it, it sounds as if Google offers vector maps on iOS, as well as on Android.
That may be due to Apple restrictions rather than a preference by Google. Unclear who's held the key.
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/blogs/press-here/Google-Would-Like-to-See-an-Updated-Version-of-Maps-for-iPhone-117828563.html
Another spectacular article D.E.D. Keep up the great work.
Re: "Even better, highly efficient vector maps allows Apple to load up a large area of maps you can continue to zoom into even after you've entered Airplane Mode."
And it would be easy to add a heuristic to maintain rendering performance, no matter what the zoom level is. In other words, as you zoom out, details below a certain point size could be ignored and not rendered. And as you zoom in, details that become bigger than the point size threshold would be rendered.
Starting in the 1980s, this kind of vector-based graphics allowed the low-powered processors of the time to draw things fast enough for interactive computer games. Asteroids, Star Wars, Battlezone, etc. all had that "wire frame" look, and were fast enough for compelling game play. Later, Adobe used vector-based graphics in their PostScript font technology and PDF page description language. All modern computing devices, more or less, now use vector-based fonts. Looking forward to seeing this technology in the Maps app.
(And who knew there was an airport in Palo Alto?)
That's true - and I didn't say anything different.
The point is that the article is misleading, but so is the post I was responding to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
"Apple Maps surpasses Google on iOS" would be accurate.
Since Maps.app is developed and maintained by Apple, this is really a case of Apple surpassing Apple. Google doesn't make the app, and their back end certainly hasn't been surpassed, as has been said many times over - they do vectors, and they have better data.
The article is very disingenuous as painting the lack of vector graphics in Maps.app as a Google problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxt
Vector this, vector that. If it hasn't got streetview I'm not interested.
Yeah, real shame Apple abandoned QTVR. I wouldn't mind some higher resolution non-Flash (on OS X) street panoramas, especially if they're done with a single shot at a time so they don't have the stitching problems Streetview panoramas sometimes have.
Apple Maps is very 1.0 at the moment. The question for me is whether they will stick with it (in which case it could eventually be as good as Google's), or whether it's not an instant hit so they abandon it (e.g. Ping).