And if Google Maps gives you directions to Peter Pan's Neverland by telling you travel through the gumdrop forest on the yellow brick road does before stepping though the looking glass does that it a real place?
You must also think this is the best route to get from Point A to B because Google Maps says so.
For **** sake! There are plenty of legitimate things to compare Google Maps to Apple Maps where Google outright wins but to force an argument that maps that have false addresses are better simply because they include them is fucking unreal.
Good job showing the walking route, which is cut by 6 hours if you go by ferries as shown here.
Now, before you start whining about Google Maps patronizing you, there is a "walking only"-route option too if you don't want to pay for the ferries.
And yes, I just registered here to highlight your spin-doctoring stupidity.
Isn't it better to take a non-existent address to somewhere that's close. If I was local, maybe I haven't been to the particular area but I would guess the general area of that address to be there like Google Maps shows. At least that's how I would give directions if a stranger comes up to me and asks for an address like that.
Close to what? Is Manhattan closer to NY than Brooklyn is? The point is that there's more than one "E 15th St" in "NY"
I beg to differ but I'm in Manhattan and searching for "318 e 15st" gives me something near state college PA. "318 e 15 st" gives me "no results found".
For me searching apple maps in NYC does not work.
I agree. Try "coney island, brooklyn" with or without the comma. Gives you a bizarre location in Brooklyn, miles from Coney Island.
I don't know why Google/Motorola was stupid enough to use a fake address. There are plenty of real ones that don't work.
That "bizarre location" is Coney Island Ave in Brooklyn, NY!
I live in the SF East bay area and tried "Coney Island" -- it found a valid "Coney Island" located about 50 miles from where I live.
If you enter "Coney Island, NY" it will find the correct location...
So it appears that iOS 6 maps has a different search algorithm than iOS 5 maps... not better or worse -- just different!
And I guarantee if you send a letter to the Stuyvesant Square's address as given by Apple's Map app, it will be returned to you as undeliverable as well. The USPS is in the business of delivering mail, not collecting property taxes. I owned several lots joined together, each with its own address as far as the city was concerned, however, there was a single house on the lot with only one address the USPS acknowledged (I know because I rented out a guest house and tried to use the corresponding property address). Not only that, but the USPS requires a proper mail receptacle for delivery of the mail. You fail to provide one, or do not comply with regulations and your mail will be returned as undeliverable as well. Just because the USPS does not acknowledge an address doesn't mean it's not real.
In fact, I used it to my advantage that Google provides property lot data to provide address at one residence where I lived on a corner lot and the main entrance was not on the property's official address. So I could give people the Google map location of the side street so they would park on the correct street and find the entrance easily. For those using my mailing address, they often got confused and had to walk out of their way.
As far as Stuyvesant Square is concerned, the NYC park service doesn't even assign it an address, so why would Apple? Google Maps doesn't assign it an address either.
So really, it's a matter of whether you prefer to have your addresses listed by property records, or by the USPS. I prefer the former as my own experiences have necessitated it. But I suppose if all you want to find are mailing addresses, then the latter way is preferred.
What Google did wasn't dishonest and it wasn't an act of desperation. Apple Maps should have known the address was fake and not try to go looking for it. Google Maps wouldn't have been fooled by the same trick because their map database is several orders of magnitude more detailed than Apple's is. Google was simply driving that point home..
"Several orders of magnitude more detailed", my arse. Google maps was fooled into estimating where they though 315 should be on E 15th Street.
<div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;"> </div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;">I've moved on from this MapCrapGate pissing contest... There are more important issues that need to be addressed:</div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;"> </div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;">I've decided to offer special training for the new iPhone 5 EarPods -- the proper methods and procedures of reinstalling the EarPods into their specially molded holder and case.</div>
[image]
Based on anecdotal experience and observation, there is a compelling need for this training...
I anticipate that it will be well received -- possibly equalling the enormously popular "Bidet For Dummies".
But it looks nice all wrapped up. I just through that casing out as I never again will attempt to use it. There might be a useful solution but that's not it.
As an aside, this is the first time Apple has shipped the plastic casing you get with headphones (at least with their in-ear phones) with the iPhone. It does look nicer but it's also extra waste in the packaging so if Apple did away with it for the 7th gen iPhone I'd prefer that.
I'd also like them to finally get rid of the wall charger because they are interchangeable and many other vendors are now using the USB-A EPS concept Apple has used for over 8 years now so I think people typically have plenty of these. It's not costly, but it does add waste, which is what the EU mandate was suppose to be reducing with their interchangeable EPS usage.
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
If every other map app shows the location where such an address would be and the NYC building authority or whatever lists it as a potential address...and it is displayed in an ad...how exactly is that underhanded and deceptive?
Because if you type in exactly what they said ("315 E 15th in Manhattan"), it takes you to the "right" place.
Because it's using a non existent address giving off a false perception that the Apple maps is inferior, when in reality, using that same example, it's the MOTO device with Google Maps that is inferior. It's sending you to a non existent address.
Imagine you fat finger an address, or someone mistakenly gives you a wrong address (or you simply wrote it down wrong). lets say you are going to 1315 e 15th, or 315 e 115th... wouldn't you want your mapping software to correct you BEFORE you venture off so you can confirm the address, or just set you off driving to find yourself in front of a park?
That's a good point, as well. So Apple's Maps is the only one that's correct. Everyone else is sending you to a non-existent address (and Google is actually bragging about sending you on a wild goose chase. Go figure). (which is why I put 'right' in quotes).
The funny part is that if you actually LOOK at the ad it says "315 e 15th st ny"
Not "315 E 15th in Manhattan"
if we're gonna be technical.
Read the article that started this thread. Now, look at the third paragraph. Here, I'll quote it for you:
"Looking for 315 E 15th in Manhattan?" Motorola Mobility posed on its Google+ site. "Google Maps on DROID RAZR M will get you there & not #iLost in Brooklyn."
If you type in exactly what they said (315 E 15th in Manhattan) it takes you to the "right" address.
What evidence? How about the blank cities around the world? How about the POI database that's only a fraction of the size of Google's? With regards to the amount of data Google stores for maps I can't find a number more recent than early 2006, but at that time they had 70 TB of data. I can only imagine that it has ballooned to petabytes by now. Nothing you say will make me believe that any of the companies whose data Apple is borrowing have such a vast database.
Sorry, but none of that is evidence. Google Maps has mistakes, too. So where is the evidence that Apple Maps has more?
You really think that Google paid someone for months just to look through a database to find missing entries? First of all, that takes minutes if not seconds as long you're leveraging the power of the computer that stores the database instead of doing it manually. Second, no company in their right mind would do that simply to make an internet-based ad.
You're right. No company in their right mind would do that simply to make an ad. But Google apparently did. How else do you think they came up with that address?
And I guarantee if you send a letter to the Stuyvesant Square's address as given by Apple's Map app, it will be returned to you as undeliverable as well. The USPS is in the business of delivering mail, not collecting property taxes. I owned several lots joined together, each with its own address as far as the city was concerned, however, there was a single house on the lot with only one address the USPS acknowledged (I know because I rented out a guest house and tried to use the corresponding property address).
The USPS is the final arbiter of addresses in the US of A, as you seem to have discovered.
Property taxes use one of the various survey systems to exactly (or in many cases, not so exactly) identify and define land boundaries instead of mailing addresses. But I suspect you knew that...
I've moved on from this MapCrapGate pissing contest... There are more important issues that need to be addressed:
I've decided to offer special training for the new iPhone 5 EarPods -- the proper methods and procedures of reinstalling the EarPods into their specially molded holder and case.
[image]
Based on anecdotal experience and observation, there is a compelling need for this training...
I anticipate that it will be well received -- possibly equalling the enormously popular "Bidet For Dummies".
But it looks nice all wrapped up. I just through that casing out as I never again will attempt to use it. There might be a useful solution but that's not it.
As an aside, this is the first time Apple has shipped the plastic casing you get with headphones (at least with their in-ear phones) with the iPhone. It does look nicer but it's also extra waste in the packaging so if Apple did away with it for the 7th gen iPhone I'd prefer that.
I'd also like them to finally get rid of the wall charger because they are interchangeable and many other vendors are now using the USB-A EPS concept Apple has used for over 8 years now so I think people typically have plenty of these. It's not costly, but it does add waste, which is what the EU mandate was suppose to be reducing with their interchangeable EPS usage.
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
As to the power supply... I think Apple' EPS is better:
Quote:
What makes Apple's iPhone charger special
Apple's power adapter is clearly a high-quality power supply designed to produce carefully filtered power. Apple has obviously gone to extra effort to reduce EMI interference, probably to keep the charger from interfering with the touchscreen.[16] When I opened the charger up, I expected to find a standard design, but I've compared the charger to the Samsung charger and several other high-quality industry designs,[17] and Apple goes beyond these designs in several ways.
The input AC is filtered thorugh a tiny ferrite ring on the plastic case (see photo below). The diode bridge output is filtered by two large capacitors and an inductor. Two other R-C snubbers filter the diode bridge, which I've only seen elsewhere in audio power supplies to prevent 60Hz hum;[6] perhaps this enhances the iTunes listening experience. Other chargers I disassembled don't use a ferrite ring and usually only a single filter capacitor. The primary circuit board has a grounded metal shield over the high-frequency components (see photo), which I haven't seen elsewhere. The transformer includes a shield winding to absorb EMI. The output circuit uses three capacitors including two relatively expensive tantalum ones[14] and an inductor for filtering, when many supplies just use one capacitor. The Y capacitor is usually omitted from other designs. The resonant clamp circuit is highly innovative.[9]
Apple's design provides extra safety in a few ways that were discussed earlier: the super-strong AC prongs, and the complex over-temperature / over-voltage shutdown circuit. Apple's isolation distance between primary and secondary appears to go beyond the regulations.
Conclusions
Apple's iPhone charger crams a lot of technology into a small space. Apple went to extra effort to provide higher quality and safety than other name-brand chargers, but this quality comes at a high cost.
If you're interested in power supplies, please take a look at my other articles: tiny, cheap, dangerous: Inside a (fake) iPhone charger, where I disassemble a $2.79 iPhone charger and discover that it violates many safety rules; don't buy one of these. Also take a look at Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did which examines the history of switching power supplies. To see Apple's adapter disassembled, check out videos created byscourtheearth and Ladyada. Finally, if you have an interesting charger lying around that you don't want, send it to me and maybe I'll write up a detailed teardown of it.
This attention to detail has always been an Apple characteristic... going back to Rod Holt's switching power supply in the Apple ][ -- it allowed the Apple ][ to [just barely] get by without needing a fan.
Apple should exercise extreme caution in implementing the hundreds of thousands of crowdsourced corrections that must be streaming in from iOS 6 Maps users currently.
As cartographers, it is expected that their Maps team should however be scrutinising every incoming request for amendments using at least 2 or 3 other mapping sources, and here's why:
It concerns the "Mocality Affair" that occurred very early this year in Kenya, East Africa and is quite a humdinger:
The USPS is the final arbiter of addresses in the US of A, as you seem to have discovered.
Property taxes use one of the various survey systems to exactly (or in many cases, not so exactly) identify and define land boundaries instead of mailing addresses. But I suspect you knew that...
Right, deliverable addresses.
So as far as Stuyvesant Square is concerned, the NYC park service doesn't even assign it an address, so why would Apple Maps? Google Maps doesn't assign it an address either.
As much as we're faulting Google for using an address which perfectly well describes a meeting point at one corner of Stuyvesant Square, which the NYC parks dept defines as a range of addresses and boundaries, Apple is just as much at fault for creating a fictitious address for the park which appears nowhere, including government documents and the USPS. If the shoe were on the other foot, and Apple was saying Google Maps could not find 297 2nd Ave NY (which it can), Apple would be just as wrong as Google since they reflect this as Stuyvesant square, even though no official source, including the USPS recognizes it as a real address. Meanwhile Google does not make the mistake of stating this is the address of Stuyvesant Square.
All I'm saying is, you can't have it both ways. I totally agree that Google screwed up here when they could have easily used a number of flawed examples (I went searching for the nearest local Walmart and Apple Maps put one in a single family home in the middle of a residential neighborhood) instead of this seemingly random fabrication. But these addresses are either valid or they're not. As I have indicated, I use such addresses to my advantage, especially when meeting someone in an otherwise unsubdivided large space. But to say the address is not a valid indication of location merely because the USPS doesn't recognize it as deliverable doesn't fly in my book. I recall numerous stories where properties were subdivided and a new address created, but it took months for the USPS to recognize it as a deliverable address, even though the city legally created and sanctioned it.The same is often true for new addresses built in rural locations. So frankly, I would prefer to have the city property detail to assist with such new addresses, since we all know by these discussions how long it takes these map apps to update information.
Just another lie from google. What else would you expect from the company that got caught circumventing safari security and ie security settings by coding around it then denying that they did anything wrong by violating millions of end users privacy. Every time google gets caught they use the "oh sorry we didn't really mean to do that".
Problem is they have done that so many times now there getting fined left and right by governments around the world. And sued by companies and organizations around the world. There being investigated by the european commission for monopolistic practices and the DOJ here at home for the same thing.
I hope they get slammed and reamed for every bit of lying they do, they deserve it and have no one to blame for there behavior but themselves.
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
I like to keep all my packaging intact so the folder with the printed material makes a nice place to store the plastic screen protector sheets.
As an off topic side note I would like to mention to those upgrading that the AT&T unlock policy has changed slightly. In the beginning they would unlock the out of contract phones at the AT&T store. Then they started using the support line 611. Now apparently you have to use the website: http://att.com/deviceunlock. After filling out the information requested they will respond in 5-7 business days to give you instructions on how to use iTunes to unlock your phone. So I am waiting...
"Apple did it with all their own hardware and software"
You do know that Samsung manufacturers a lot of the hardware in the iPhone right? Apple doesn't make its own hardware anymore because it was shit.
You fail to understand the ecosystem. When I want a cheeseburger, I don't go raise a calf to a cow, kill it, butcher it, age it, and grind it. No, I buy it all ready to cook so I can spend my time designing the tastiest burger ever with the pickles which I don't grow and cheese which I don't culture and salt I don't mine. Apple designs the specifications for the phone and the menial laborers produce the required components required to assemble the final product.
I like to keep all my packaging intact so the folder with the printed material makes a nice place to store the plastic screen protector sheets.
As an off topic side note I would like to mention to those upgrading that the AT&T unlock policy has changed slightly. In the beginning they would unlock the out of contract phones at the AT&T store. Then they started using the support line 611. Now apparently you have to use the website: http://att.com/deviceunlock. After filling out the information requested they will respond in 5-7 business days to give you instructions on how to use iTunes to unlock your phone. So I am waiting...
1) I keep all the packing materials, too, save for the plastic wrap over the box, but I never thought to put the plastic screen protectors in the documentation sleeve.
2) Thanks! I restored my iPhone 4 last night expecting the unlock to appear. I was just going to go to an AT&T store at some point to get it resolved. I had it on my list of errands for the weekend. You just saved me some time.
Apple won't sue because they would lose in court. Everyone, including Apple, knows that the premature release of Maps is the biggest mistake Apple has made since the release of the original iPhone.
Despite having a year left in their contract with Google, Apple decided to replace Google Maps with its own inferior solution, which is missing many useful features such as bike paths, public transportation route, street view, etc. Not to mention all of the problems they have with things like the Statue of Liberty being flattened. Since Apple usually ADDS features instead of REMOVING them, one can only come to the conclusion that iOS6 was more about APPLE and not its USERS. You know the situation is dire when Steven Colbert makes fun of the iPhone as he loves Apple products and is always promoting them on his show.
Maps, needs a Beta tag. Perhaps even an Alpha tag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I hope Apple sues them into oblivion.
Equally important, I hope that all the media that has been spewing this fact-free story will retract it and publicize Google's fraud. Of course, that's probably too much to ask.
In spite of all the noise, there's not one shred of evidence that Apple's Maps is significantly worse than the other options out there. They all have failures.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
And if Google Maps gives you directions to Peter Pan's Neverland by telling you travel through the gumdrop forest on the yellow brick road does before stepping though the looking glass does that it a real place?
You must also think this is the best route to get from Point A to B because Google Maps says so.
For **** sake! There are plenty of legitimate things to compare Google Maps to Apple Maps where Google outright wins but to force an argument that maps that have false addresses are better simply because they include them is fucking unreal.
Good job showing the walking route, which is cut by 6 hours if you go by ferries as shown here.
Now, before you start whining about Google Maps patronizing you, there is a "walking only"-route option too if you don't want to pay for the ferries.
And yes, I just registered here to highlight your spin-doctoring stupidity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Chen
Isn't it better to take a non-existent address to somewhere that's close. If I was local, maybe I haven't been to the particular area but I would guess the general area of that address to be there like Google Maps shows. At least that's how I would give directions if a stranger comes up to me and asks for an address like that.
Close to what? Is Manhattan closer to NY than Brooklyn is? The point is that there's more than one "E 15th St" in "NY"
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVoyeur
Quote:
Originally Posted by smags
I beg to differ but I'm in Manhattan and searching for "318 e 15st" gives me something near state college PA. "318 e 15 st" gives me "no results found".
For me searching apple maps in NYC does not work.
I agree. Try "coney island, brooklyn" with or without the comma. Gives you a bizarre location in Brooklyn, miles from Coney Island.
I don't know why Google/Motorola was stupid enough to use a fake address. There are plenty of real ones that don't work.
That "bizarre location" is Coney Island Ave in Brooklyn, NY!
I live in the SF East bay area and tried "Coney Island" -- it found a valid "Coney Island" located about 50 miles from where I live.
If you enter "Coney Island, NY" it will find the correct location...
So it appears that iOS 6 maps has a different search algorithm than iOS 5 maps... not better or worse -- just different!
https://tools.usps.com/go/ZipLookupResultsAction!input.action?resultMode=0&companyName=&address1=297+2nd+ave&address2=&city=&state=Select&urbanCode=&postalCode=&zip=10003
In fact, I used it to my advantage that Google provides property lot data to provide address at one residence where I lived on a corner lot and the main entrance was not on the property's official address. So I could give people the Google map location of the side street so they would park on the correct street and find the entrance easily. For those using my mailing address, they often got confused and had to walk out of their way.
As far as Stuyvesant Square is concerned, the NYC park service doesn't even assign it an address, so why would Apple? Google Maps doesn't assign it an address either.
So really, it's a matter of whether you prefer to have your addresses listed by property records, or by the USPS. I prefer the former as my own experiences have necessitated it. But I suppose if all you want to find are mailing addresses, then the latter way is preferred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popnfresh
What Google did wasn't dishonest and it wasn't an act of desperation. Apple Maps should have known the address was fake and not try to go looking for it. Google Maps wouldn't have been fooled by the same trick because their map database is several orders of magnitude more detailed than Apple's is. Google was simply driving that point home..
"Several orders of magnitude more detailed", my arse. Google maps was fooled into estimating where they though 315 should be on E 15th Street.
Newsflash: If the USPS says it's not a valid address, it's not a valid address.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popnfresh
Of course, the Fandroids won't see it that way, because in their mind Apple can do no right.
Fixed.
But it looks nice all wrapped up. I just through that casing out as I never again will attempt to use it. There might be a useful solution but that's not it.
As an aside, this is the first time Apple has shipped the plastic casing you get with headphones (at least with their in-ear phones) with the iPhone. It does look nicer but it's also extra waste in the packaging so if Apple did away with it for the 7th gen iPhone I'd prefer that.
I'd also like them to finally get rid of the wall charger because they are interchangeable and many other vendors are now using the USB-A EPS concept Apple has used for over 8 years now so I think people typically have plenty of these. It's not costly, but it does add waste, which is what the EU mandate was suppose to be reducing with their interchangeable EPS usage.
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
Because if you type in exactly what they said ("315 E 15th in Manhattan"), it takes you to the "right" place.
That's a good point, as well. So Apple's Maps is the only one that's correct. Everyone else is sending you to a non-existent address (and Google is actually bragging about sending you on a wild goose chase. Go figure). (which is why I put 'right' in quotes).
Read the article that started this thread. Now, look at the third paragraph. Here, I'll quote it for you:
If you type in exactly what they said (315 E 15th in Manhattan) it takes you to the "right" address.
Sorry, but none of that is evidence. Google Maps has mistakes, too. So where is the evidence that Apple Maps has more?
You're right. No company in their right mind would do that simply to make an ad. But Google apparently did. How else do you think they came up with that address?
Another excellent point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
And I guarantee if you send a letter to the Stuyvesant Square's address as given by Apple's Map app, it will be returned to you as undeliverable as well. The USPS is in the business of delivering mail, not collecting property taxes. I owned several lots joined together, each with its own address as far as the city was concerned, however, there was a single house on the lot with only one address the USPS acknowledged (I know because I rented out a guest house and tried to use the corresponding property address).
The USPS is the final arbiter of addresses in the US of A, as you seem to have discovered.
Property taxes use one of the various survey systems to exactly (or in many cases, not so exactly) identify and define land boundaries instead of mailing addresses. But I suspect you knew that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I've moved on from this MapCrapGate pissing contest... There are more important issues that need to be addressed:
I've decided to offer special training for the new iPhone 5 EarPods -- the proper methods and procedures of reinstalling the EarPods into their specially molded holder and case.
[image]
Based on anecdotal experience and observation, there is a compelling need for this training...
I anticipate that it will be well received -- possibly equalling the enormously popular "Bidet For Dummies".
But it looks nice all wrapped up. I just through that casing out as I never again will attempt to use it. There might be a useful solution but that's not it.
As an aside, this is the first time Apple has shipped the plastic casing you get with headphones (at least with their in-ear phones) with the iPhone. It does look nicer but it's also extra waste in the packaging so if Apple did away with it for the 7th gen iPhone I'd prefer that.
I'd also like them to finally get rid of the wall charger because they are interchangeable and many other vendors are now using the USB-A EPS concept Apple has used for over 8 years now so I think people typically have plenty of these. It's not costly, but it does add waste, which is what the EU mandate was suppose to be reducing with their interchangeable EPS usage.
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
As to the power supply... I think Apple' EPS is better:
Quote:
Apple's power adapter is clearly a high-quality power supply designed to produce carefully filtered power. Apple has obviously gone to extra effort to reduce EMI interference, probably to keep the charger from interfering with the touchscreen.[16] When I opened the charger up, I expected to find a standard design, but I've compared the charger to the Samsung charger and several other high-quality industry designs,[17] and Apple goes beyond these designs in several ways.What makes Apple's iPhone charger special
The input AC is filtered thorugh a tiny ferrite ring on the plastic case (see photo below). The diode bridge output is filtered by two large capacitors and an inductor. Two other R-C snubbers filter the diode bridge, which I've only seen elsewhere in audio power supplies to prevent 60Hz hum;[6] perhaps this enhances the iTunes listening experience. Other chargers I disassembled don't use a ferrite ring and usually only a single filter capacitor. The primary circuit board has a grounded metal shield over the high-frequency components (see photo), which I haven't seen elsewhere. The transformer includes a shield winding to absorb EMI. The output circuit uses three capacitors including two relatively expensive tantalum ones[14] and an inductor for filtering, when many supplies just use one capacitor. The Y capacitor is usually omitted from other designs. The resonant clamp circuit is highly innovative.[9]
Apple's design provides extra safety in a few ways that were discussed earlier: the super-strong AC prongs, and the complex over-temperature / over-voltage shutdown circuit. Apple's isolation distance between primary and secondary appears to go beyond the regulations.
Apple's iPhone charger crams a lot of technology into a small space. Apple went to extra effort to provide higher quality and safety than other name-brand chargers, but this quality comes at a high cost.Conclusions
If you're interested in power supplies, please take a look at my other articles: tiny, cheap, dangerous: Inside a (fake) iPhone charger, where I disassemble a $2.79 iPhone charger and discover that it violates many safety rules; don't buy one of these. Also take a look at Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did which examines the history of switching power supplies. To see Apple's adapter disassembled, check out videos created byscourtheearth and Ladyada. Finally, if you have an interesting charger lying around that you don't want, send it to me and maybe I'll write up a detailed teardown of it.
http://www.arcfn.com/2012/05/apple-iphone-charger-teardown-quality.html
This attention to detail has always been an Apple characteristic... going back to Rod Holt's switching power supply in the Apple ][ -- it allowed the Apple ][ to [just barely] get by without needing a fan.
Just mailed this paper to David Pogue's NYTimes. He instantly reacted. Hopefully this will get known.
As cartographers, it is expected that their Maps team should however be scrutinising every incoming request for amendments using at least 2 or 3 other mapping sources, and here's why:
It concerns the "Mocality Affair" that occurred very early this year in Kenya, East Africa and is quite a humdinger:
http://technoose.com/strike-two-for-google-with-openstreetmap-vandalism-claim/
http://opengeodata.org/google-ip-vandalizing-openstreetmap
A lot of posts that don't toe the "Apple is GOD" line are deleted...
pathetic.
So as far as Stuyvesant Square is concerned, the NYC park service doesn't even assign it an address, so why would Apple Maps? Google Maps doesn't assign it an address either.
As much as we're faulting Google for using an address which perfectly well describes a meeting point at one corner of Stuyvesant Square, which the NYC parks dept defines as a range of addresses and boundaries, Apple is just as much at fault for creating a fictitious address for the park which appears nowhere, including government documents and the USPS. If the shoe were on the other foot, and Apple was saying Google Maps could not find 297 2nd Ave NY (which it can), Apple would be just as wrong as Google since they reflect this as Stuyvesant square, even though no official source, including the USPS recognizes it as a real address. Meanwhile Google does not make the mistake of stating this is the address of Stuyvesant Square.
All I'm saying is, you can't have it both ways. I totally agree that Google screwed up here when they could have easily used a number of flawed examples (I went searching for the nearest local Walmart and Apple Maps put one in a single family home in the middle of a residential neighborhood) instead of this seemingly random fabrication. But these addresses are either valid or they're not. As I have indicated, I use such addresses to my advantage, especially when meeting someone in an otherwise unsubdivided large space. But to say the address is not a valid indication of location merely because the USPS doesn't recognize it as deliverable doesn't fly in my book. I recall numerous stories where properties were subdivided and a new address created, but it took months for the USPS to recognize it as a deliverable address, even though the city legally created and sanctioned it.The same is often true for new addresses built in rural locations. So frankly, I would prefer to have the city property detail to assist with such new addresses, since we all know by these discussions how long it takes these map apps to update information.
Problem is they have done that so many times now there getting fined left and right by governments around the world. And sued by companies and organizations around the world. There being investigated by the european commission for monopolistic practices and the DOJ here at home for the same thing.
I hope they get slammed and reamed for every bit of lying they do, they deserve it and have no one to blame for there behavior but themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
PS: I think this is the first iPhone that had extra printed material describing the features. I wonder if it's because some of them, like Passbook, are still a bit unusual for many to grasp.
I like to keep all my packaging intact so the folder with the printed material makes a nice place to store the plastic screen protector sheets.
As an off topic side note I would like to mention to those upgrading that the AT&T unlock policy has changed slightly. In the beginning they would unlock the out of contract phones at the AT&T store. Then they started using the support line 611. Now apparently you have to use the website: http://att.com/deviceunlock. After filling out the information requested they will respond in 5-7 business days to give you instructions on how to use iTunes to unlock your phone. So I am waiting...
"Apple did it with all their own hardware and software"
You do know that Samsung manufacturers a lot of the hardware in the iPhone right? Apple doesn't make its own hardware anymore because it was shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omgdracula
"Apple did it with all their own hardware and software"
You do know that Samsung manufacturers a lot of the hardware in the iPhone right? Apple doesn't make its own hardware anymore because it was shit.
You fail to understand the ecosystem. When I want a cheeseburger, I don't go raise a calf to a cow, kill it, butcher it, age it, and grind it. No, I buy it all ready to cook so I can spend my time designing the tastiest burger ever with the pickles which I don't grow and cheese which I don't culture and salt I don't mine. Apple designs the specifications for the phone and the menial laborers produce the required components required to assemble the final product.
1) I keep all the packing materials, too, save for the plastic wrap over the box, but I never thought to put the plastic screen protectors in the documentation sleeve.
2) Thanks! I restored my iPhone 4 last night expecting the unlock to appear. I was just going to go to an AT&T store at some point to get it resolved. I had it on my list of errands for the weekend. You just saved me some time.
The mere fact that you have, and continue to, post utterly disproves this point.
However, you did take us to a nice fantasy-land for a moment, didn't you? ;-)
Despite having a year left in their contract with Google, Apple decided to replace Google Maps with its own inferior solution, which is missing many useful features such as bike paths, public transportation route, street view, etc. Not to mention all of the problems they have with things like the Statue of Liberty being flattened. Since Apple usually ADDS features instead of REMOVING them, one can only come to the conclusion that iOS6 was more about APPLE and not its USERS. You know the situation is dire when Steven Colbert makes fun of the iPhone as he loves Apple products and is always promoting them on his show.
Maps, needs a Beta tag. Perhaps even an Alpha tag.
I hope Apple sues them into oblivion.
Equally important, I hope that all the media that has been spewing this fact-free story will retract it and publicize Google's fraud. Of course, that's probably too much to ask.
In spite of all the noise, there's not one shred of evidence that Apple's Maps is significantly worse than the other options out there. They all have failures.