Exactly - it is a work in progress and there really are no shortcuts. When Street View came out (and still) there were many areas it did not cover. Apple should strike a deal with UPS and mount camera's on their trucks, just to get going, and develop from there.
Good idea but the UPS trucks are perhaps a bit too tall. Dick's idea of crowd sourcing it was along a similar vein but this type of data collection has to be extremely precise and the only way to do that is with dedicated vehicles and equipment using trained operators. When I looked in the Bing contractor's truck it was like a mini data center in there with racks of servers. I got to talk to him while he was waiting for a replacement alternator which I learned was a special heavy duty one to run all the computers. Apparently those vehicles require a lot of heavy duty electrical components. That said I saw a picture of a Google Street View vehicle and it was just an ordinary looking economy crossover type car with a camera tripod on top. Maybe they use a different technique.
That was exactly my point when they first unveiled the features of the new Maps App. Hasn't Apple's philosophy always been to make products and services that were significantly better (in all aspects) than the competition? To me, this new App is a "Beta" at best. Before Siri, I can't remember when Apple produced "Beta" versions of software? This seems very Un-Apple-like. They've always had the position to produced finished products the first time and only improve with updates. This new vision seems like a step backwards for Apple.
I only use street view occasionally on iOS, so it's fine for me to have it available in a separate Google app, for now. I actually think, though, that to avoid degrading their product Apple should continue to license street view from Google, keeping it as a low profile feature of iOS maps for the moment while they build their own independent version.
I've been using iOS 6 since the first beta and while Maps has improved significantly I do miss Street View. There is no substitute for finding an address by taking a virtual stroll down the street.
But that's exactly what Flyover provides - a virtual view. I routinely use Street View to picture where I'm going, and to see what a storefront or venue looks like before I arrive. But Flyover provides at least 80% of the same information, and lets you back out and see it from multiple angles, fluently moving the map around. Street View does have value, but no so much that people aren't going to use Flyover instead. And Flyover has value that StreetView doesn't, in addition to being less of a lawsuit magnent.
After my initial "fun" with FlyOver I have not used it since. I simply don't see how this feature will be useful in finding a location. On top of that, in an area with any substantial structures you can't even begin to see the street because the height of the building is blocking your view.
I have no problem with this feature being included but i do have a problem with a useful being removed. If Apple wanted to compete Google on mapping then why not make their own Street View. I can't imagine there are patents that prevent Apple from strapping a camera to a car, it's in how the tech is executed after that.
Couldn't use the tech with FlyOver to get very detailed digital images that are very precise in how far away from the edges of the buildings they are so regardless of how far the vehicle is on the street you could adjust your viewing position to be on the sideway and still get the same perspective. I'd personally like a tech that would recognize every vehicle shape and people so that Apple's version of Street View would eliminate all those elements from the image with the tech that allows FlyOver to see so many angles at once. Nice clean streets without mobile object blocking facades an signage.
Flyover can certainly be improved upon (including allowing you to get a more shallow view, figuring out how to navigate better, how to more efficiently load blocks, etc) but for a 1.0 product it is spectacular. They're be the same crowd that hates on Maps just like the people who complained and are still complaining about how they asked Siri a question and got something other than what they expected, or didn't immediately get a response, but those people will be there to complain about anything Apple does.
It's not like Apple can't improve upon software in the future, particularly OS-level software that obtains its data from the cloud.
Street View data acquisition is like painting the Golden Gate Bridge - you have to keep redoing it. Google is on their third pass in my area. If Apple wanted to replicate the Street View experience they could probably collect enough imagery in about 2 years.
Exactly - it is a work in progress and there really are no shortcuts. When Street View came out (and still) there were many areas it did not cover. Apple should strike a deal with UPS and mount camera's on their trucks, just to get going, and develop from there.
Ohh... Great Idea! Might be a problem as many UPS trucks have a large opening in the center of the roof -- and I think it is used with special loading devices...
So, it may not be as easy as just bolting a camera on the truck.
As I think of it, most cities and towns are strapped for funds and have vehicles that visit most streets on a regular basis.. I wonder if they could get income by providing "street view" services to mapping companies like Apple -- or even Google.
I suspect that the camera is a weather-proof, self-contained capsule (battery, GPS, etc.) that runs itself. You could easily mount (or dismount) it on any vehicle.
Meh. I enjoy Street View and use it a lot. Flyover doesn't seem to be a complete replacement, but it seems like it'll do if your city is covered. In the above examples, you can get a better idea of a building in downtown San Francisco than using Street View (here's one 50 foot stretch; here's another; here's another). On Flyover, you can get a view of the entire block and see how it connects to the neighboring streets and alleys in a fluid, fun way.
Again, not a complete replacement if you're looking for a detailed look at the parking meters or signage. But an easier way to get an "omniscient" block-level understanding of things. That, combined with arguably better vector maps and rotating labels, make for pretty good competition IMO. I'm sure they'll add public transportation soon enough.
Me too, but for some reason, spending millions to create a free service just to keep you from using someone else's free service is terribly important to tech companies.
Rather than being a political squabble among fools, it's really a strategic effort to avoid sending one's customers to another vendor. It's all about controlling the value of the platform. If I happily rely on Google to provide my iOS maps, I'm more likely to want to get Google's exclusive maps features in the future, and guess where Google is going to deliver them? On its own platform.
So it's not really as silly of a move as you paint.
I am a frequent traveler and use Street View a lot. I have been an iphone user since the initial launch of the original iPhone. This whole maps enhancement/downgrade/change/politics issue will mark the first time that I dont upgrade to the latest version of iOS as soon as it launches. Crossing my fingers that google launches a native maps application. Although I am worried that apple may pull the "duplicate functionality" play from the rule book. Also, why is nobody talking about the ability to set default applications for certain actions? For example using a native google app to open an address location on a map, or being able to set default browser other than Safari?
If I had to choose between street view and turn by turn voice navigation, I will take voice navigation every time. The vast majority of Americans at least will use the Maps app while they are driving and hopefully won't even be looking at the screen at all. Good voice navigation is all I was looking for in iOS 6 and Apple seems to have delivered that at least.
Sure, I would also like to have street view as well. But I mostly used that feature on my Mac with a 30" monitor and not my iPhone. I would look up the address before I left the house to get a quick look or in some case look at places I was not even planning to visit. I will still be able to do that so no loss for me and if I really want to save that image of a location I could just send that screenshot to my iPhone.
How is the voice turn by turn for you iOS 6 beta testers?
While 3D Flyovers are impressive, I have to remark a feature of StreetView that I would miss: the ability to literally walk into some street shops. For example, see http://goo.gl/maps/2YJCh. Click on the double '>>' on the floor and you get to walk in and see what the shop looks like.
But you can't do that on iOS 5 Maps, nor from iOS devices using a web browser, because StreetView on the web requires Flash.
So you're identifying a feature iOS has never had before, and worrying that people will miss it. It appears that a large % of iOS users don't even realize that Street View is available in the current Maps. So the only people who will miss is are the handful of bloggers who will try to make a big stink about it.
If Google releases its own Maps client for iOS 6 (or enhances Earth), the minority that wants to step along streets one panorama at a time can have that, but I doubt the mass market is looking for some feature that isn't even widely known to exist.
As for finding the occasion interior mapped building, a) those aren't very ubiquitous and b) the company Apple acquired to develop Flyover already has offered similar interior photography services in the past. So Apple won't have any trouble rolling out inside views of malls and lobbies if there is interest in that.
For me personally, with turn by turn navigation, I have no use for streetview. In fact, I've only used streetview on my computer while looking for a new home, when my wife and I were trying to get a feel for certain neighborhoods before physically driving through them.
If Siri can tell me "your destination is 100 yds on the right" and then "you have arrived at your destination" I don't care if there is a picture of the building or not, I can take it from there. Do some of you need help finding the front door, too?
But as far as flyover goes, it's neat but I can't see me using it for anything more than showing the kids the view Superman has.
The whole thing was a classic tempest in a teapot manufactured by "sensitive" people. ...
There is absolutely no rational reason even for blurring faces and licence plates (they didn't do it originally of course), but irrationality, sensitivity, and a gigantic sense of self-entitlement wins against logic, reason, and common sense every time nowadays it seems...
How people feel is never "rational," by definition. I feel sorry for your wife and/or kids, or if you don't have any, comforted.
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
If there is anything factually wrong or misleading about the article, it should be easy for you to point out. If not, your baseless assertions aren't very valuable.
When you comment using words and phrases such as spin, nauseated and bend the truth, but don't actually identify anything that made you physically sick, it says more about you than the article. The piece is reviewing Apple's strategy in replacing Google in Maps.
I’m sure I’ll have Google’s (upcoming) maps app on hand as a backup, for transit if nothing else. But it looks like Flyover MIGHT be able to answer most of the purposes I use Street View for: figuring out where a driveway or entrance is, which building to park at, etc.
(Street View could still do those jobs even better in some ways—if Google’s images weren’t so blurry and sun-blasted! If I can’t read most signs in EITHER Street View or Flyover, maybe I’ll prefer Flyover’s speed and ease of navigation. If not, Google’s app will be there for me! Google’s app will probably arrive sooner than my city gets Flyover, in fact.)
How people feel is never "rational," by definition. I feel sorry for your wife and/or kids, or if you don't have any, comforted.
So your suggesting it makes sense to go back on years of legal precedent, when no actual danger or privacy concern actually exists, simply because people "feel" that a privacy concern exists? That's a very slippery slope indeed.
If we are all going to just proceed based on our feelings rather than facts and evidence what's the point of being human at all? We might as well be monkeys in the jungle instead. We'd certainly be much happier.
Personally, I'm in favour of this whole "civilisation" thing myself. I believe that humans are better than the other animals and have the possibility of acting outside of our animal nature, and indeed, possibly overcoming it.
I'm also an atheist, but in fact, pretty much all the major religions even agree with me on this point as well (see "the Fall of Man", Adam, etc.).
Pro-tip: Get a decent Internet connection that doesn't take 10 minutes to load a few pictures! It's 2012!!
I'm in a building wired with Gigabit, just a couple of wiring closets away from the Internet backbone and I experienced a long slow delay downloading these pictures for the article as well. Not sure why, but yeah it was like a journey back to 1993 downloading this article today for me.
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
Yeah, I agree strongly on this one. He even refers to Google's street view cameras as "spy cameras" at one point. He probably isn't even aware he's doing that though.
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
Yeah, I agree strongly on this one. He even refers to Google's street view cameras as "spy cameras" at one point. He probably isn't even aware he's doing that though.
Yeah, I almost expected DED to call it: "Paparazzi-View" instead of "Street-View".
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Exactly - it is a work in progress and there really are no shortcuts. When Street View came out (and still) there were many areas it did not cover. Apple should strike a deal with UPS and mount camera's on their trucks, just to get going, and develop from there.
Good idea but the UPS trucks are perhaps a bit too tall. Dick's idea of crowd sourcing it was along a similar vein but this type of data collection has to be extremely precise and the only way to do that is with dedicated vehicles and equipment using trained operators. When I looked in the Bing contractor's truck it was like a mini data center in there with racks of servers. I got to talk to him while he was waiting for a replacement alternator which I learned was a special heavy duty one to run all the computers. Apparently those vehicles require a lot of heavy duty electrical components. That said I saw a picture of a Google Street View vehicle and it was just an ordinary looking economy crossover type car with a camera tripod on top. Maybe they use a different technique.
I only use street view occasionally on iOS, so it's fine for me to have it available in a separate Google app, for now. I actually think, though, that to avoid degrading their product Apple should continue to license street view from Google, keeping it as a low profile feature of iOS maps for the moment while they build their own independent version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I've been using iOS 6 since the first beta and while Maps has improved significantly I do miss Street View. There is no substitute for finding an address by taking a virtual stroll down the street.
But that's exactly what Flyover provides - a virtual view. I routinely use Street View to picture where I'm going, and to see what a storefront or venue looks like before I arrive. But Flyover provides at least 80% of the same information, and lets you back out and see it from multiple angles, fluently moving the map around. Street View does have value, but no so much that people aren't going to use Flyover instead. And Flyover has value that StreetView doesn't, in addition to being less of a lawsuit magnent.
After my initial "fun" with FlyOver I have not used it since. I simply don't see how this feature will be useful in finding a location. On top of that, in an area with any substantial structures you can't even begin to see the street because the height of the building is blocking your view.
I have no problem with this feature being included but i do have a problem with a useful being removed. If Apple wanted to compete Google on mapping then why not make their own Street View. I can't imagine there are patents that prevent Apple from strapping a camera to a car, it's in how the tech is executed after that.
Couldn't use the tech with FlyOver to get very detailed digital images that are very precise in how far away from the edges of the buildings they are so regardless of how far the vehicle is on the street you could adjust your viewing position to be on the sideway and still get the same perspective. I'd personally like a tech that would recognize every vehicle shape and people so that Apple's version of Street View would eliminate all those elements from the image with the tech that allows FlyOver to see so many angles at once. Nice clean streets without mobile object blocking facades an signage.Flyover can certainly be improved upon (including allowing you to get a more shallow view, figuring out how to navigate better, how to more efficiently load blocks, etc) but for a 1.0 product it is spectacular. They're be the same crowd that hates on Maps just like the people who complained and are still complaining about how they asked Siri a question and got something other than what they expected, or didn't immediately get a response, but those people will be there to complain about anything Apple does.
It's not like Apple can't improve upon software in the future, particularly OS-level software that obtains its data from the cloud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Street View data acquisition is like painting the Golden Gate Bridge - you have to keep redoing it. Google is on their third pass in my area. If Apple wanted to replicate the Street View experience they could probably collect enough imagery in about 2 years.
Exactly - it is a work in progress and there really are no shortcuts. When Street View came out (and still) there were many areas it did not cover. Apple should strike a deal with UPS and mount camera's on their trucks, just to get going, and develop from there.
Ohh... Great Idea! Might be a problem as many UPS trucks have a large opening in the center of the roof -- and I think it is used with special loading devices...
So, it may not be as easy as just bolting a camera on the truck.
As I think of it, most cities and towns are strapped for funds and have vehicles that visit most streets on a regular basis.. I wonder if they could get income by providing "street view" services to mapping companies like Apple -- or even Google.
I suspect that the camera is a weather-proof, self-contained capsule (battery, GPS, etc.) that runs itself. You could easily mount (or dismount) it on any vehicle.
...some real possibilities, here...
Meh. I enjoy Street View and use it a lot. Flyover doesn't seem to be a complete replacement, but it seems like it'll do if your city is covered. In the above examples, you can get a better idea of a building in downtown San Francisco than using Street View (here's one 50 foot stretch; here's another; here's another). On Flyover, you can get a view of the entire block and see how it connects to the neighboring streets and alleys in a fluid, fun way.
Again, not a complete replacement if you're looking for a detailed look at the parking meters or signage. But an easier way to get an "omniscient" block-level understanding of things. That, combined with arguably better vector maps and rotating labels, make for pretty good competition IMO. I'm sure they'll add public transportation soon enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail
Me too, but for some reason, spending millions to create a free service just to keep you from using someone else's free service is terribly important to tech companies.
Rather than being a political squabble among fools, it's really a strategic effort to avoid sending one's customers to another vendor. It's all about controlling the value of the platform. If I happily rely on Google to provide my iOS maps, I'm more likely to want to get Google's exclusive maps features in the future, and guess where Google is going to deliver them? On its own platform.
So it's not really as silly of a move as you paint.
The more you know (TM)
I am a frequent traveler and use Street View a lot. I have been an iphone user since the initial launch of the original iPhone. This whole maps enhancement/downgrade/change/politics issue will mark the first time that I dont upgrade to the latest version of iOS as soon as it launches. Crossing my fingers that google launches a native maps application. Although I am worried that apple may pull the "duplicate functionality" play from the rule book. Also, why is nobody talking about the ability to set default applications for certain actions? For example using a native google app to open an address location on a map, or being able to set default browser other than Safari?
If I had to choose between street view and turn by turn voice navigation, I will take voice navigation every time. The vast majority of Americans at least will use the Maps app while they are driving and hopefully won't even be looking at the screen at all. Good voice navigation is all I was looking for in iOS 6 and Apple seems to have delivered that at least.
Sure, I would also like to have street view as well. But I mostly used that feature on my Mac with a 30" monitor and not my iPhone. I would look up the address before I left the house to get a quick look or in some case look at places I was not even planning to visit. I will still be able to do that so no loss for me and if I really want to save that image of a location I could just send that screenshot to my iPhone.
How is the voice turn by turn for you iOS 6 beta testers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckerz
While 3D Flyovers are impressive, I have to remark a feature of StreetView that I would miss: the ability to literally walk into some street shops. For example, see http://goo.gl/maps/2YJCh. Click on the double '>>' on the floor and you get to walk in and see what the shop looks like.
But you can't do that on iOS 5 Maps, nor from iOS devices using a web browser, because StreetView on the web requires Flash.
So you're identifying a feature iOS has never had before, and worrying that people will miss it. It appears that a large % of iOS users don't even realize that Street View is available in the current Maps. So the only people who will miss is are the handful of bloggers who will try to make a big stink about it.
If Google releases its own Maps client for iOS 6 (or enhances Earth), the minority that wants to step along streets one panorama at a time can have that, but I doubt the mass market is looking for some feature that isn't even widely known to exist.
As for finding the occasion interior mapped building, a) those aren't very ubiquitous and b) the company Apple acquired to develop Flyover already has offered similar interior photography services in the past. So Apple won't have any trouble rolling out inside views of malls and lobbies if there is interest in that.
For me personally, with turn by turn navigation, I have no use for streetview. In fact, I've only used streetview on my computer while looking for a new home, when my wife and I were trying to get a feel for certain neighborhoods before physically driving through them.
If Siri can tell me "your destination is 100 yds on the right" and then "you have arrived at your destination" I don't care if there is a picture of the building or not, I can take it from there. Do some of you need help finding the front door, too?
But as far as flyover goes, it's neat but I can't see me using it for anything more than showing the kids the view Superman has.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
No one with even half a brain ever did.
The whole thing was a classic tempest in a teapot manufactured by "sensitive" people. ...
There is absolutely no rational reason even for blurring faces and licence plates (they didn't do it originally of course), but irrationality, sensitivity, and a gigantic sense of self-entitlement wins against logic, reason, and common sense every time nowadays it seems...
How people feel is never "rational," by definition. I feel sorry for your wife and/or kids, or if you don't have any, comforted.
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jugney
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
If there is anything factually wrong or misleading about the article, it should be easy for you to point out. If not, your baseless assertions aren't very valuable.
When you comment using words and phrases such as spin, nauseated and bend the truth, but don't actually identify anything that made you physically sick, it says more about you than the article. The piece is reviewing Apple's strategy in replacing Google in Maps.
I’m sure I’ll have Google’s (upcoming) maps app on hand as a backup, for transit if nothing else. But it looks like Flyover MIGHT be able to answer most of the purposes I use Street View for: figuring out where a driveway or entrance is, which building to park at, etc.
(Street View could still do those jobs even better in some ways—if Google’s images weren’t so blurry and sun-blasted! If I can’t read most signs in EITHER Street View or Flyover, maybe I’ll prefer Flyover’s speed and ease of navigation. If not, Google’s app will be there for me! Google’s app will probably arrive sooner than my city gets Flyover, in fact.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CletusVanDam
Why include 22 full-size pictures directly in the article? This article took about 10-minutes to load.
Pro-tip: Include low-res picture previews that link to the full-size pictures next time...
Pro-tip: Get a decent Internet connection that doesn't take 10 minutes to load a few pictures! It's 2012!!
Here's something to consider...
Does street view need to be static images stitched together in a panorama?
What if that rotating camera took video images that could later be separated into continuous directional video.
Then you could play/pause/step the continuous video -- rather than the cumbersome UI that street view currently has.
Then, you could specify a starting location and an ending location (or just drag your finger) and take a "drive by" or "walk by" tour of your route.
Even more, on your "drive by" or "walk by" tour you could stop and take detours when you see things of interest.
I believe with the technology available today, you could do a pretty decent job of interactive video for a "drive by" or "walk by" tour.
Here's a simple animation technique that dates back to 180 AD -- and forms the basis for videos and animation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoetrope
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
How people feel is never "rational," by definition. I feel sorry for your wife and/or kids, or if you don't have any, comforted.
So your suggesting it makes sense to go back on years of legal precedent, when no actual danger or privacy concern actually exists, simply because people "feel" that a privacy concern exists? That's a very slippery slope indeed.
If we are all going to just proceed based on our feelings rather than facts and evidence what's the point of being human at all? We might as well be monkeys in the jungle instead. We'd certainly be much happier.
Personally, I'm in favour of this whole "civilisation" thing myself. I believe that humans are better than the other animals and have the possibility of acting outside of our animal nature, and indeed, possibly overcoming it.
I'm also an atheist, but in fact, pretty much all the major religions even agree with me on this point as well (see "the Fall of Man", Adam, etc.).
Quote:
Originally Posted by el3ktro
Pro-tip: Get a decent Internet connection that doesn't take 10 minutes to load a few pictures! It's 2012!!
I'm in a building wired with Gigabit, just a couple of wiring closets away from the Internet backbone and I experienced a long slow delay downloading these pictures for the article as well. Not sure why, but yeah it was like a journey back to 1993 downloading this article today for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jugney
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
Yeah, I agree strongly on this one. He even refers to Google's street view cameras as "spy cameras" at one point. He probably isn't even aware he's doing that though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Quote:
Originally Posted by jugney
I am a loyal Apple user, which is why I come to pro-Apple sites like AppleInsider. But articles like this go well beyond slant, squarely into the territory of spin. I literally felt nauseated from the constant efforts throughout the article to bend the truth, and make any possible dig at Google and say any possible positive thing about Apple. Just how much stock do you own again?
Yeah, I agree strongly on this one. He even refers to Google's street view cameras as "spy cameras" at one point. He probably isn't even aware he's doing that though.
Yeah, I almost expected DED to call it: "Paparazzi-View" instead of "Street-View".