I am 100% the opposite. I have never once found a use for street view and only have a single friend that uses it "once or twice per year". I really do not see the point of street view beyond a "look what we did!!!".
I have found the Fly Over much more useful in visualizing where and how to get places and its one very big weak spot is the lack of current coverage.
What we really need is 3D models with Street View level data. I like the information Street View gives me - I can "walk" a path before I go there and figure out exactly where I need to go - but the UI is clunky and tedious to use because you can't do it fluidly. Combining the two technologies would give the best results, or at least once the hardware can handle it. Right now it feels like neither solution is perfect although Street View is more useful.
The world is becoming a boring place when people aren't willing to explore.
Here's an idea, why even go somewhere when you can sit in the comfort of your home and do it all on a screen?
another example. Let's say you had lunch at some place, saw a shop a couple doors down you wanted to visit but didn't have the time to go. Now you forgot the name. Just pull up street view...problem solved.
Take a photo, it's stored complete with location and date.
Your phone has a camera, I often use it in parking lots so I can find my car.
I didn't even think about subway mapping? You mean iOS 6 Maps has no subway overlays? That would really piss me off since I highly rely on them when traveling. Grrrr. Plus in Beijing, the subway exits are so crazy, sometimes you're a full block away from the intersection by the time you exit the subway. Google Maps does have some really good overlays for that!
I'm an OSX user (three OSX machines), but I don't have any smartphone/tablet at this time. I was considering either the iPad or the iPhone as my next purchase but, if I'm going to lack StreetView, I'm sorry but I'll choose a non-Apple product.
So you do not use street view on a mobile device, you use it on a computer.
Nothing will change if you buy an iPhone or iPad.
Thank you for playing but your excuse is a failure.
I imagine using flyover over data will destroy your data plan in seconds/minutes. That's alot of stuff to download. Literally thousands of textured surfaces.
Then, if it isn't the same, and the purposes aren't the same, why write this article like if Flyover makes StreetView obsolete?
If I wish to know how an address is, I don't want a continuous flyover over a big area with low-quality imagery data, no matter how cool it is. I want such a level of detail that makes it necessary to blur faces or license plates. So, such need to blur is not a disadvantage (as you seem to imply), but the consequence of the level of detail I wish to have.
I use StreetView for both my work (as an architect), and for my spare time (for travel planning), and it's a tool that really helps me, and no, it can't be substituted by the flyover feature you mention here, because they're different features, with different purposes, just like you admitted.
I'm an OSX user (three OSX machines), but I don't have any smartphone/tablet at this time. I was considering either the iPad or the iPhone as my next purchase but, if I'm going to lack StreetView, I'm sorry but I'll choose a non-Apple product.
And you dare to say GoogleEarth is "creepy"? Do you mean it's creepier than the AppStore and the recent Apple strategy to forbid Google to provide iOS users with superb StreetView experience?
A word to Apple: You've done a lot of money with iOS. So, I believe you've the resources to ship a camera-car to every street in the whole World, and beat Google's StreetView. But, please, if you want to knock Google, just knock Google, and not us your iOS users: First knock Google by developing a real alternative to StreetView. And then kill StreetView if you wish, but don't kill SV first, as then you leave us without a feature we want to have. As I said, I won't purchase any iOS device if it lacks StreetView.
I don't think Apple cares if you won't purchase any iOS device without streetview. There's maybe you and 4 other people in the world that will make a purchasing decision based on that, so stop pretending you have leverage. Apple's streetview replacement is flyover. They're not gonna develop their own streetview, would be a massive waste of resources and incredibly redundant. In most scenarios, flyover is superior, as it can be infinitely manipulated, more easily updated, and a more seamless and holistic solution, as well as being extremely detailed. Tell me, how often will Google remap the world? What they mapped will remain as it is for an extremely long time. 3D models can much more easily be updated. Streetview will become obsolete extremely quickly.
Regardless, Google will still have their own maps app available in the appstore. Stop your needless whining.
Exactly! Except for the missing Street view capability there's no going back to iOS 5 maps.
I just checked the find iPhone app and it uses the same map capability on iOS six as the maps app. However it doesn't have rotate or the same level of zoom that the maps app does. I hope they add that in the future. Also I'd like to see some sort of continuous tracking app -- with proper authorization of course.
Could someone please post a flyover of (say) Brussels, Belgium please
That would be too easy, as Brussels is a big city and I'd expect them to have it in flyover soon, or maybe they already have it (well, let's be frank here: I expect them to already have Brussels, Paris, London, etc... or otherwise they don't have a product at all).
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
The (very small) group of people claiming Flyover is a real alternative for StreetView because StreetView would be a huge task for Apple, are totally missing the point: The work behind StreetView is not only the camera-cars: it's the huge, huge, huge (huge) amount of small towns it covers all over the World. Do you claim it's less work for Apple to have the same towns on flyover? Otherwise, if this small group claims they're happy if Flyover covers the -say- 20 biggest cities in the World, then, well, no comment... don't pretend such an small coverage can compete with StreetView, not only in image detail, but also in towns coverage.
[...] Regardless, Google will still have their own maps app available in the appstore. Stop your needless whining.
Really? I thought the article said there was a reasonable doubt that Google Maps with StreetView could be accepted in the AppStore. Maybe I didn't read it right. Of course I'll be happy if the AppStore has an app with StreetView.
[...] Tell me, how often will Google remap the world? What they mapped will remain as it is for an extremely long time. 3D models can much more easily be updated. Streetview will become obsolete extremely quickly. [...]
You didn't read how Flyover is generated, did you? It doesn't suffice with satellite imagery. If it only needed sat pics, of course the whole World could be automatically updated in 3D very quickly. In addition to sat maps, they also need footage from planes flying at low altitude (otherwise they wouldn't have images for the facades, they'd only have the roofs).
So, you think it's "much more easier" to send low altitude camera planes to the 47 countries (fourty-seven countries) covered by StreetView than using camera-cars? I really cannot see why the former would be easier than the later, unless you imply to only cover a dozen cities in flyover, which is what you seem to be considering.
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
You could have said Cavan ;-), at least give them a fighting chance. Or as Belgium is concerned Leuven. But no one has posted anything yet, so either the thread is dead or I am right.
But fact is that not even Bing Maps does have Steetside for Belgium (or transit). Apple may very well leverage map data from Navteq (Nokia), Tele Atlas (TomTom) and OSM, so on the 2D aspect I expect them to do great things. But -as ever- their 'superior' product that will blow us out of the sky, will be very US centric for the foreseable future.
I do not recall how many time GM saved the bacon during our vacation in Thailand and S/E Asia, so I would be very very disappointed seeing GM depart from the iUniverse
Don't think this has been mentioned yet, but in January 2011, C3 Technologies (who Apple later acquired) were already working on their own street view:
So Apple's version of StreetView (I'm still calling it DriveThrough/WalkThrough) may come sooner than we think, depending on how much they had progressed with it.
Don't think this has been mentioned yet, but in January 2011, C3 Technologies (who Apple later acquired) were already working on their own street view:
So Apple's version of StreetView (I'm still calling it DriveThrough/WalkThrough) may come sooner than we think, depending on how much they had progressed with it.
I remember seeing those videos before Apple bought C3.
What's weird is that the places shown in these videos are not, yet, available in 3D on iOS 6 maps.
I forgot about the street view, though
Edit: Here's an example of Hoover Dam shown in 3D... not so good...
Names rotate. That's pretty. But that's not what I was talking about. Google Maps has a phenomenal database. It's the new 411 really. If I want a type of business nearby I type that business category into Google Maps first. And then look around. Even mom and pop stores are in GMaps. Yelp integration won't come close to compensating for that loss of data. No transit info (and it's going to be years before appropriate 3rd party apps come in). And this doesn't just mean NYC (where you'll likely get a 3rd party app quickly). Let's see how fast 3rd party apps for all these places:
I'm sure we'll have transit information for Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Lansing, Michigan in no time. And the interface will be absolutely uniform between all the third-party apps so transit navigation is just the same for me in Mumbai or Toronto. Meanwhile, Google is moving on to this:
Some will say that Google is evil. Here' what I respect about Google. They'll do something just for the heck of it. Even when there's no clear profit motive. They worry about commercialization later. Apple would never (in a million years at least) do something like this:
I'm pretty sure, I'll have to be grateful if Apple covers Ottawa (where I live) before the end of the decade with Flyover. Corner Brook, Newfoundland? There will be teleporters by then.
======
I wonder if Apple is just being cheap here. If TomTom is providing them the database why didn't they buy access to the Streetview data. TomTom is creating a rival version:
I can appreciate that Apple is trying to compete. But let's not pretend, this is some kind of great leap forward. It's really a wash. You get prettier maps. But a significantly degraded database. And real loss of functionality (like walk/bike/transit directions/navigation and Streetview). Usually when Apple does something, it's exceptionally well executed. For example, compare Passbook to Google Wallet. But Maps? It's got Beta written all over it.
Here's my prediction. Most users are scarcely going to notice Flyover. But they will notice less data and lack of anything other than driving directions. Hopefully, driving navigation makes up for the loss of everything else.
That would be too easy, as Brussels is a big city and I'd expect them to have it in flyover soon, or maybe they already have it (well, let's be frank here: I expect them to already have Brussels, Paris, London, etc... or otherwise they don't have a product at all).
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
The (very small) group of people claiming Flyover is a real alternative for StreetView because StreetView would be a huge task for Apple, are totally missing the point: The work behind StreetView is not only the camera-cars: it's the huge, huge, huge (huge) amount of small towns it covers all over the World. Do you claim it's less work for Apple to have the same towns on flyover? Otherwise, if this small group claims they're happy if Flyover covers the -say- 20 biggest cities in the World, then, well, no comment... don't pretend such an small coverage can compete with StreetView, not only in image detail, but also in towns coverage.
I will post a 3D Flyover of Dundalk, Ireland as soon as you post a video demonstrating the use of voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation to Jade Garden in Dundalk using Google Maps in iOS 5. This is why Google Maps in iOS 5 isn't a product at all. Not only does Google Maps in iOS 5 not have voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation, Google Maps in iOS 5 does even show a listing for Jade Garden in Dundalk, Ireland. I will concede that Jade Garden may, in fact, be listed but Google's Maps is such a horrible mess than I was unable to see the location.
Apple was entirely correct to move from an inferior, crippled product to their own mapping and navigation architecture and infrastructure including their own database of points of interest which has far more business listings than Google. (1)
Names rotate. That's pretty. But that's not what I was talking about. Google Maps has a phenomenal database. It's the new 411 really. If I want a type of business nearby I type that business category into Google Maps first. And then look around. Even mom and pop stores are in GMaps. Yelp integration won't come close to compensating for that loss of data. No transit info (and it's going to be years before appropriate 3rd party apps come in). And this doesn't just mean NYC (where you'll likely get a 3rd party app quickly). Let's see how fast 3rd party apps for all these places:
...
Here's my prediction. Most users are scarcely going to notice Flyover. But they will notice less data and lack of anything other than driving directions. Hopefully, driving navigation makes up for the loss of everything else.
I can go to maps.google.com on my iPad... What's your point?
As for finding businesses on iOS 5 maps (released) and iOS 6 maps (unreleased) I found I usually get a few more hits with iOS 5 maps (as expected). However, each found some that the other missed... not so good if you're the Mom and Pop business that isn't listed, eh?
As an aside. do businesses pay to get listed by Google or Yelp?
AIR, Apple mentioned that they would incorporate crowd sourcing, and that the map database Apple uses is open source -- so that anyone can contribute data. I suspect that many of the millions of satisfied iDevice owners will be glad to help flesh out the database.
Finally, as I posted before, Apple could license access to Google features that the iOS 6 maps app currently lacks... just like they did with iOS 5 maps.
I can go to maps.google.com on my iPad... What's your point?
As for finding businesses on iOS 5 maps (released) and iOS 6 maps (unreleased) I found I usually get a few more hits with iOS 5 maps (as expected). However, each found some that the other missed... not so good if you're the Mom and Pop business that isn't listed, eh?
As an aside. do businesses pay to get listed by Google or Yelp?
AIR, Apple mentioned that they would incorporate crowd sourcing, and that the map database Apple uses is open source -- so that anyone can contribute data. I suspect that many of the millions of satisfied iDevice owners will be glad to help flesh out the database.
Finally, as I posted before, Apple could license access to Google features that the iOS 6 maps app currently lacks... just like they did with iOS 5 maps.
As you can see in my post, his statement that Google has more business listings was erroneous at best and a falsehood at worst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
I will post a 3D Flyover of Dundalk, Ireland as soon as you post a video demonstrating the use of voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation to Jade Garden in Dundalk using Google Maps in iOS 5. This is why Google Maps in iOS 5 isn't a product at all. Not only does Google Maps in iOS 5 not have voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation, Google Maps in iOS 5 does even show a listing for Jade Garden in Dundalk, Ireland. I will concede that Jade Garden may, in fact, be listed but Google's Maps is such a horrible mess than I was unable to see the location.
Apple was entirely correct to move from an inferior, crippled product to their own mapping and navigation architecture and infrastructure including their own database of points of interest which has far more business listings than Google. (1)
I find it interesting that we can list a multitude of ways that Apple Maps in iOS 6 Beta 4 is superior to Google Maps in iOS 5 while Google Maps proponents continue to focus on their sole argument of superiority, a feature which 50% of a tech savvy subset of users (Twitter followers of a tech blogger) were unaware existed on the iPhone.
Comments
I am 100% the opposite. I have never once found a use for street view and only have a single friend that uses it "once or twice per year". I really do not see the point of street view beyond a "look what we did!!!".
I have found the Fly Over much more useful in visualizing where and how to get places and its one very big weak spot is the lack of current coverage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
What we really need is 3D models with Street View level data. I like the information Street View gives me - I can "walk" a path before I go there and figure out exactly where I need to go - but the UI is clunky and tedious to use because you can't do it fluidly. Combining the two technologies would give the best results, or at least once the hardware can handle it. Right now it feels like neither solution is perfect although Street View is more useful.
The world is becoming a boring place when people aren't willing to explore.
Here's an idea, why even go somewhere when you can sit in the comfort of your home and do it all on a screen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
"What was the name of that [insert business name] we were at when we were in [insert city name] last [insert previous time frame]?"
Shhh! that lap dance club in Cincinnati is supposed to be a secret.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
another example. Let's say you had lunch at some place, saw a shop a couple doors down you wanted to visit but didn't have the time to go. Now you forgot the name. Just pull up street view...problem solved.
Take a photo, it's stored complete with location and date.
Your phone has a camera, I often use it in parking lots so I can find my car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
I didn't even think about subway mapping? You mean iOS 6 Maps has no subway overlays? That would really piss me off since I highly rely on them when traveling. Grrrr. Plus in Beijing, the subway exits are so crazy, sometimes you're a full block away from the intersection by the time you exit the subway. Google Maps does have some really good overlays for that!
There's an App for that. grrr
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
I'm an OSX user (three OSX machines), but I don't have any smartphone/tablet at this time. I was considering either the iPad or the iPhone as my next purchase but, if I'm going to lack StreetView, I'm sorry but I'll choose a non-Apple product.
So you do not use street view on a mobile device, you use it on a computer.
Nothing will change if you buy an iPhone or iPad.
Thank you for playing but your excuse is a failure.
I imagine using flyover over data will destroy your data plan in seconds/minutes. That's alot of stuff to download. Literally thousands of textured surfaces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
Then, if it isn't the same, and the purposes aren't the same, why write this article like if Flyover makes StreetView obsolete?
If I wish to know how an address is, I don't want a continuous flyover over a big area with low-quality imagery data, no matter how cool it is. I want such a level of detail that makes it necessary to blur faces or license plates. So, such need to blur is not a disadvantage (as you seem to imply), but the consequence of the level of detail I wish to have.
I use StreetView for both my work (as an architect), and for my spare time (for travel planning), and it's a tool that really helps me, and no, it can't be substituted by the flyover feature you mention here, because they're different features, with different purposes, just like you admitted.
I'm an OSX user (three OSX machines), but I don't have any smartphone/tablet at this time. I was considering either the iPad or the iPhone as my next purchase but, if I'm going to lack StreetView, I'm sorry but I'll choose a non-Apple product.
And you dare to say GoogleEarth is "creepy"? Do you mean it's creepier than the AppStore and the recent Apple strategy to forbid Google to provide iOS users with superb StreetView experience?
A word to Apple: You've done a lot of money with iOS. So, I believe you've the resources to ship a camera-car to every street in the whole World, and beat Google's StreetView. But, please, if you want to knock Google, just knock Google, and not us your iOS users: First knock Google by developing a real alternative to StreetView. And then kill StreetView if you wish, but don't kill SV first, as then you leave us without a feature we want to have. As I said, I won't purchase any iOS device if it lacks StreetView.
I don't think Apple cares if you won't purchase any iOS device without streetview. There's maybe you and 4 other people in the world that will make a purchasing decision based on that, so stop pretending you have leverage. Apple's streetview replacement is flyover. They're not gonna develop their own streetview, would be a massive waste of resources and incredibly redundant. In most scenarios, flyover is superior, as it can be infinitely manipulated, more easily updated, and a more seamless and holistic solution, as well as being extremely detailed. Tell me, how often will Google remap the world? What they mapped will remain as it is for an extremely long time. 3D models can much more easily be updated. Streetview will become obsolete extremely quickly.
Regardless, Google will still have their own maps app available in the appstore. Stop your needless whining.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Exactly! Except for the missing Street view capability there's no going back to iOS 5 maps.
I just checked the find iPhone app and it uses the same map capability on iOS six as the maps app. However it doesn't have rotate or the same level of zoom that the maps app does. I hope they add that in the future. Also I'd like to see some sort of continuous tracking app -- with proper authorization of course.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Google Maps iOS 5 provides the following upgrades versus Apple Maps iOS 6 Beta 4:
Google Street View
Terrain View (versus Digital Elevation Model) including contour lines with contour intervals
However, there are many upgrades that people seem to overlook in Apple Maps iOS 6:
Navigation Features:
voice activated navigation
voice guided navigation
bird's eye view
nearly instantaneous re-routing
Improved yelp integration:
ability to simply touch the icon for a point of interest to view the yelp information
Ratings
Number of reviews
relative cost (as indicted by yelp's $$$ system)
Hours
home page (which opens Safari to the page)
"More Info on yelp" (opens yelp app)
yelp check in
"Write a Tip"
"Add Photo on yelp"
more Photos available
3D Flyover view (3D Satellite or 3D Hybrid views) with 360 degree views including tilt
3D Standard view with 360 degree views including tilt
Digital Elevation Model (versus Terrain View)
ability to rotate the map to any orientation
compass always shows North (see previous)
Apple Maps automatically provides potential matches to typed searches
Street names are much more visible
Upon zooming out, Apple Maps displays names of neighborhood rather than every... single... street... name
Google traffic displays a constantly flashing unintelligible criss-cross of red-yellow-green lines
Google traffic doesn't display road construction or accidents
Business listings are nearly impossible to see
Key points-of-interest are difficult to see (airports, hospitals)
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Could someone please post a flyover of (say) Brussels, Belgium please
Quote:
Originally Posted by freelander51
Could someone please post a flyover of (say) Brussels, Belgium please
That would be too easy, as Brussels is a big city and I'd expect them to have it in flyover soon, or maybe they already have it (well, let's be frank here: I expect them to already have Brussels, Paris, London, etc... or otherwise they don't have a product at all).
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
The (very small) group of people claiming Flyover is a real alternative for StreetView because StreetView would be a huge task for Apple, are totally missing the point: The work behind StreetView is not only the camera-cars: it's the huge, huge, huge (huge) amount of small towns it covers all over the World. Do you claim it's less work for Apple to have the same towns on flyover? Otherwise, if this small group claims they're happy if Flyover covers the -say- 20 biggest cities in the World, then, well, no comment... don't pretend such an small coverage can compete with StreetView, not only in image detail, but also in towns coverage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
[...] Regardless, Google will still have their own maps app available in the appstore. Stop your needless whining.
Really? I thought the article said there was a reasonable doubt that Google Maps with StreetView could be accepted in the AppStore. Maybe I didn't read it right. Of course I'll be happy if the AppStore has an app with StreetView.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
[...] Tell me, how often will Google remap the world? What they mapped will remain as it is for an extremely long time. 3D models can much more easily be updated. Streetview will become obsolete extremely quickly. [...]
You didn't read how Flyover is generated, did you? It doesn't suffice with satellite imagery. If it only needed sat pics, of course the whole World could be automatically updated in 3D very quickly. In addition to sat maps, they also need footage from planes flying at low altitude (otherwise they wouldn't have images for the facades, they'd only have the roofs).
So, you think it's "much more easier" to send low altitude camera planes to the 47 countries (fourty-seven countries) covered by StreetView than using camera-cars? I really cannot see why the former would be easier than the later, unless you imply to only cover a dozen cities in flyover, which is what you seem to be considering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
You could have said Cavan ;-), at least give them a fighting chance. Or as Belgium is concerned Leuven. But no one has posted anything yet, so either the thread is dead or I am right.
But fact is that not even Bing Maps does have Steetside for Belgium (or transit). Apple may very well leverage map data from Navteq (Nokia), Tele Atlas (TomTom) and OSM, so on the 2D aspect I expect them to do great things. But -as ever- their 'superior' product that will blow us out of the sky, will be very US centric for the foreseable future.
I do not recall how many time GM saved the bacon during our vacation in Thailand and S/E Asia, so I would be very very disappointed seeing GM depart from the iUniverse
Don't think this has been mentioned yet, but in January 2011, C3 Technologies (who Apple later acquired) were already working on their own street view:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/1/17/from-sweden-next-gen2c-nsa-like-3d-maps-thatll-knock-your-socks-off.aspx
So Apple's version of StreetView (I'm still calling it DriveThrough/WalkThrough) may come sooner than we think, depending on how much they had progressed with it.
I remember seeing those videos before Apple bought C3.
What's weird is that the places shown in these videos are not, yet, available in 3D on iOS 6 maps.
I forgot about the street view, though
Edit: Here's an example of Hoover Dam shown in 3D... not so good...
@Dick Applebaum
Names rotate. That's pretty. But that's not what I was talking about. Google Maps has a phenomenal database. It's the new 411 really. If I want a type of business nearby I type that business category into Google Maps first. And then look around. Even mom and pop stores are in GMaps. Yelp integration won't come close to compensating for that loss of data. No transit info (and it's going to be years before appropriate 3rd party apps come in). And this doesn't just mean NYC (where you'll likely get a 3rd party app quickly). Let's see how fast 3rd party apps for all these places:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/landing/transit/#mdy
I'm sure we'll have transit information for Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Lansing, Michigan in no time. And the interface will be absolutely uniform between all the third-party apps so transit navigation is just the same for me in Mumbai or Toronto. Meanwhile, Google is moving on to this:
http://maps.google.com/help/maps/transit/partners/live-updates.html
=====
Some will say that Google is evil. Here' what I respect about Google. They'll do something just for the heck of it. Even when there's no clear profit motive. They worry about commercialization later. Apple would never (in a million years at least) do something like this:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2012/08/22/north-google-street-view.html
I'm pretty sure, I'll have to be grateful if Apple covers Ottawa (where I live) before the end of the decade with Flyover. Corner Brook, Newfoundland? There will be teleporters by then.
======
I wonder if Apple is just being cheap here. If TomTom is providing them the database why didn't they buy access to the Streetview data. TomTom is creating a rival version:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/29/tomtom-working-on-its-own-street-view-like-service/
======
I can appreciate that Apple is trying to compete. But let's not pretend, this is some kind of great leap forward. It's really a wash. You get prettier maps. But a significantly degraded database. And real loss of functionality (like walk/bike/transit directions/navigation and Streetview). Usually when Apple does something, it's exceptionally well executed. For example, compare Passbook to Google Wallet. But Maps? It's got Beta written all over it.
Here's my prediction. Most users are scarcely going to notice Flyover. But they will notice less data and lack of anything other than driving directions. Hopefully, driving navigation makes up for the loss of everything else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
That would be too easy, as Brussels is a big city and I'd expect them to have it in flyover soon, or maybe they already have it (well, let's be frank here: I expect them to already have Brussels, Paris, London, etc... or otherwise they don't have a product at all).
I'd better ask for (say) Dundalk, Ireland (yes, it's on StreetView, as well as most -if not all- towns with >500 people population on all countries who didn't ban SV).
The (very small) group of people claiming Flyover is a real alternative for StreetView because StreetView would be a huge task for Apple, are totally missing the point: The work behind StreetView is not only the camera-cars: it's the huge, huge, huge (huge) amount of small towns it covers all over the World. Do you claim it's less work for Apple to have the same towns on flyover? Otherwise, if this small group claims they're happy if Flyover covers the -say- 20 biggest cities in the World, then, well, no comment... don't pretend such an small coverage can compete with StreetView, not only in image detail, but also in towns coverage.
I will post a 3D Flyover of Dundalk, Ireland as soon as you post a video demonstrating the use of voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation to Jade Garden in Dundalk using Google Maps in iOS 5. This is why Google Maps in iOS 5 isn't a product at all. Not only does Google Maps in iOS 5 not have voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation, Google Maps in iOS 5 does even show a listing for Jade Garden in Dundalk, Ireland. I will concede that Jade Garden may, in fact, be listed but Google's Maps is such a horrible mess than I was unable to see the location.
Apple was entirely correct to move from an inferior, crippled product to their own mapping and navigation architecture and infrastructure including their own database of points of interest which has far more business listings than Google. (1)
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }1. Mark Milian. Published 12 June 2012. Apple Maps Already Has More Business Listings Than Google. Bloomberg. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
@Dick Applebaum
Names rotate. That's pretty. But that's not what I was talking about. Google Maps has a phenomenal database. It's the new 411 really. If I want a type of business nearby I type that business category into Google Maps first. And then look around. Even mom and pop stores are in GMaps. Yelp integration won't come close to compensating for that loss of data. No transit info (and it's going to be years before appropriate 3rd party apps come in). And this doesn't just mean NYC (where you'll likely get a 3rd party app quickly). Let's see how fast 3rd party apps for all these places:
...
Here's my prediction. Most users are scarcely going to notice Flyover. But they will notice less data and lack of anything other than driving directions. Hopefully, driving navigation makes up for the loss of everything else.
I can go to maps.google.com on my iPad... What's your point?
As for finding businesses on iOS 5 maps (released) and iOS 6 maps (unreleased) I found I usually get a few more hits with iOS 5 maps (as expected). However, each found some that the other missed... not so good if you're the Mom and Pop business that isn't listed, eh?
As an aside. do businesses pay to get listed by Google or Yelp?
AIR, Apple mentioned that they would incorporate crowd sourcing, and that the map database Apple uses is open source -- so that anyone can contribute data. I suspect that many of the millions of satisfied iDevice owners will be glad to help flesh out the database.
Finally, as I posted before, Apple could license access to Google features that the iOS 6 maps app currently lacks... just like they did with iOS 5 maps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I can go to maps.google.com on my iPad... What's your point?
As for finding businesses on iOS 5 maps (released) and iOS 6 maps (unreleased) I found I usually get a few more hits with iOS 5 maps (as expected). However, each found some that the other missed... not so good if you're the Mom and Pop business that isn't listed, eh?
As an aside. do businesses pay to get listed by Google or Yelp?
AIR, Apple mentioned that they would incorporate crowd sourcing, and that the map database Apple uses is open source -- so that anyone can contribute data. I suspect that many of the millions of satisfied iDevice owners will be glad to help flesh out the database.
Finally, as I posted before, Apple could license access to Google features that the iOS 6 maps app currently lacks... just like they did with iOS 5 maps.
As you can see in my post, his statement that Google has more business listings was erroneous at best and a falsehood at worst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
I will post a 3D Flyover of Dundalk, Ireland as soon as you post a video demonstrating the use of voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation to Jade Garden in Dundalk using Google Maps in iOS 5. This is why Google Maps in iOS 5 isn't a product at all. Not only does Google Maps in iOS 5 not have voice activated, voice guided turn-by-turn navigation, Google Maps in iOS 5 does even show a listing for Jade Garden in Dundalk, Ireland. I will concede that Jade Garden may, in fact, be listed but Google's Maps is such a horrible mess than I was unable to see the location.
Apple was entirely correct to move from an inferior, crippled product to their own mapping and navigation architecture and infrastructure including their own database of points of interest which has far more business listings than Google. (1)
1. Mark Milian. Published 12 June 2012. Apple Maps Already Has More Business Listings Than Google. Bloomberg. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }I find it interesting that we can list a multitude of ways that Apple Maps in iOS 6 Beta 4 is superior to Google Maps in iOS 5 while Google Maps proponents continue to focus on their sole argument of superiority, a feature which 50% of a tech savvy subset of users (Twitter followers of a tech blogger) were unaware existed on the iPhone.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }