Google Maps right now is head and shoulders above iOS6 Maps. You can argue the merits of each image till the cows come home it does not change a thing.
So until iOS maps prove themselves and fix those aweful graphics they will remain the butt of all map related jokes. Having said that I have notice times when iOS maps does look better than GMaps but that is only in the US.... on a global scale they are light years ahead,
... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.
Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.
However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.
The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.
Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.
Google Maps right now is head and shoulders above iOS6 Maps. You can argue the merits of each image till the cows come home it does not change a thing.
No, the facts are that a lot of whiners are SAYING that Google Maps is head and shoulders above Apple's Maps, but no one has yet provided any scientific evidence to support that allegation.
As soon as you have evidence showing a statistical difference between the two, feel free to present it.
... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.
Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.
However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.
The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.
Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.
I have no idea what you are reading from my post to conclude that it is ridiculous, but if you really are reading that I believe that there is no thought behind Apple's maps then you are reading it incorrectly. I don't know what you mean by "running queries unintelligently against a data set", and I never made that assertion. All these systems run queries against sets of data, with varyingly sophisticated algorithms to parse and modify the output. The only comment I made about that was in support of the idea of returning the nearest real address.
It should be fairly simple to determine if iOS maps typically do or do not return non-existent addresses, which would give more insight into whether they have a policy on that or whether it is determined just by the completeness of the data that they use, which may well vary geographically.
With the caveats that there are obviously some data issues to be resolved and that I now use one of the third party apps to access street view when I need it, I prefer Apple's implementation and I support their decision to move away from dependence on Google for mapping.
Both OS are great, both have stuff that sucks. No way around it just facts.
Google takes risks when developing new tech (true innovation). Apple does not, they play it safe, but they do like to make existing stuff look and feel awesome (e.g. turn by turn Navigation, 4G, and maybe next year NFC). People on both side need to stop the hate & the fan crap and be objective. At the end of the day it is all about what works better for you; and for the companies it should be about how to improve and/or invent technology that will make life easier and more convenient for the world.
Simply curious why you think Tim Cook felt he needed to apologize to Apple owners using Apple's new maps? It's not a trap question either, I'm truly interested in your personal view on why it was done. To me it seems very un-Apple-like to release a PR statement referring to a non-existent problem, and even more so to apologize for it.
Simply curious why you think Tim Cook felt he needed to apologize to Apple owners using Apple's new maps? It's not a trap question either, I'm truly interested in your personal view on why it was done. To me it seems very un-Apple-like to release a PR statement referring to a non-existent problem, and even more so to apologize for it.
Cook had four options:
1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.
2. Backtrack and drop Apple Maps and get a new agreement with Google. This does the same thing - as well as gives Google even more leverage over the platform.
3. Do what Jobs did with the antennagate issue and come out with facts and evidence that every phone has the same issue and yours is actually better than most. This also inflames the haters. In addition, I doubt if anyone has sufficient evidence to make a statistically valid sample comparing the accuracy of the different maps, so it's probably not possible.
4. Tell the audience that "we're aware we're not perfect and we can do better. Here's what we're doing to address your concerns".
From a PR perspective, that takes the wind out of the sails of the Apple haters and allows Apple to continue to do what they are already working on (there are already plenty of reports of errors that have been fixed). So, regardless of what the actual facts are, the letter he sent is probably the best thing he could do to make the issue go away.
1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.
I don't get why that would be the case. Apple did this dozens of times with Steve at the helm, and this never happened.
Steve only wrote letters when he wanted to push the human race forward. When something Apple would never do was happening or when something that didn't directly affect users was happening.
Tim doing the same would have resulted in a letter while Google was still the mapping service. In it, he would have made public the reason Apple made their own maps (Google refusing to provide turn by turn, as an example of something we still don't know), as well as their plan for the future thereof.
Doing THAT preemptively would have removed most of the legitimate complaints with the service at launch and all of the illegitimate ones. I wish he would have done that.
Come on people you're smarter than this. Ever think they just used a fake address in a similar way advertisers use fake 555 phone numbers. Everyone knows the problem exists they just made up a 555 address big deal.
Millions of users in the Apple community disoriented...Apple, this is a monumental and fundamental part of what makes the iPhone or any smartphone a fledging Internet communications device. We have become so dependant on this in our daily lives and we take google maps as a feature that we pay for on iPhone having paid 1000's of dollars on products.
When the first iPhone came out, google maps was a primary feature and since then it always has been for millions of us. Now... Suddenly this smartphone is not so smart after all is it?
All we as customers want is some official statement regarding the situation so we can make calculated decisions in our own lives. The majority of users don't care about your beef with Google... We just want to know what's going to be done about this fiasco of epic proportions.
Really? REALLY??? "epic proportions"? Wow dude...you're life must be otherwise quite meaningless!
Come on people you're smarter than this. Ever think they just used a fake address in a similar way advertisers use fake 555 phone numbers. Everyone knows the problem exists they just made up a 555 address big deal.
I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.
This just confirms the impression that most of the noise over maps on iOS 6 is coming from a Google orchestrated PR campaign that includes false and misleading ads like this one, significant shepherding of media and bloggers to "get Google's story out", and a wide-scale astroturfing campaign.
The question the media and blogosphere out to be asking is, "Is there any deception that Google will not stoop to?"
couldn't have said it better myself. Apple should sue over misleading customers. what if apple were to publish and ad stating that searching on google gives your pc a virus???
"I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made."
Okay lets go with that line of reasoning. What's more stupid using a fake address or not being able to find a real address. Or what's more stupid using one fake address in an advertisement and everyone obviously knows it's a fake address or having to spend hours putting the pins in the correct location and reporting location problems for every business in your town. The problem exists just because they used a fake address in an advertisement doesn't magically make IOS6 maps feel less stupid. Sure it may be stupid but it's just an advertisement it's not a product that someone spent money on that doesn't live up to it's goal.
Stop right there. Start over. Retract any assumptions about "everyone knowing" something.
Also retract any assumptions that Google Maps is infallible, and then start over.
I never said google maps was infallible. Every man made device, application, etc. is fallible. And yes everyone that would be interested in this article knows that maps is a problem. When the CEO of Apple releases a statement suggesting that it's customers use a different map application or mapping website until they bring their application up to standards then I feel okay saying that everyone knows it's a problem.
You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.
How did I not respond to your original position: "...as stupid a move as can be made." An application that is paid for that isn't up to standard is as stupid a move as can be made.
You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.
I've never seen mention on where that ad was placed other than to Moto's own page on Google+. Did Motorola publish it elsewhere or pay to have it advertised on other webpages or magazines? Just curious if anyone has seen it as an ad anywhere at all in the wild?
Comments
Regardless of who said what and when......
The facts are
Google Maps right now is head and shoulders above iOS6 Maps. You can argue the merits of each image till the cows come home it does not change a thing.
So until iOS maps prove themselves and fix those aweful graphics they will remain the butt of all map related jokes. Having said that I have notice times when iOS maps does look better than GMaps but that is only in the US.... on a global scale they are light years ahead,
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.
Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.
However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.
The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.
Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.
No, the facts are that a lot of whiners are SAYING that Google Maps is head and shoulders above Apple's Maps, but no one has yet provided any scientific evidence to support that allegation.
As soon as you have evidence showing a statistical difference between the two, feel free to present it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
... I wasn't arguing that Google's results were more correct than Apple's, nor defending the use of the address to make the ad, just noting that the argument that Apple might deliberately be excluding non-existent addresses from the results is weakened when the address was returned when including the Manhattan qualifier.
That it is also now returned without the Manhattan qualifier in the query is likely due to all the fuss, but does also suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses.
Personally I would like to see such addresses returned with a note stating that they are non-existent, interpolated locations.
Your suggestion would be another way to handle it, which no one uses now.
However, the argument that Apple is providing the best possible real address isn't affected at all by the fact that the results change if you constrain the search to a different area. It just means that they aren't approaching it in an entirely simplistic manner.
The change also does not, "suggest that they do not have an implemented policy of excluding such addresses." It is obviously in response to the "fuss" over this dishonest Google ad. But the fact that they can override policy does not suggest they don't have one.
Your post is ridiculous. You are essentially claiming that there is no thought at all behind Apple's Maps. That they are just running queries, unintelligently, against a data set and whatever comes out comes out. It's absurd to even suggest that. The only thing suggested by this example is that they didn't copy (reverse engineer) Google's results, but have their own, thoughtful, implementation.
I have no idea what you are reading from my post to conclude that it is ridiculous, but if you really are reading that I believe that there is no thought behind Apple's maps then you are reading it incorrectly. I don't know what you mean by "running queries unintelligently against a data set", and I never made that assertion. All these systems run queries against sets of data, with varyingly sophisticated algorithms to parse and modify the output. The only comment I made about that was in support of the idea of returning the nearest real address.
It should be fairly simple to determine if iOS maps typically do or do not return non-existent addresses, which would give more insight into whether they have a policy on that or whether it is determined just by the completeness of the data that they use, which may well vary geographically.
With the caveats that there are obviously some data issues to be resolved and that I now use one of the third party apps to access street view when I need it, I prefer Apple's implementation and I support their decision to move away from dependence on Google for mapping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B
With two posts. And you joined last week. Uh, yeah, not buying it.
Fanatics are funny (on both OS)
In this case, even Apple pretty much admitted that the map application sucks. And you people cant?
See for your self....
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57522196-37/apple-ceo-we-are-extremely-sorry-for-maps-flap/?tag=nl.e498&s_cid=e498
Both OS are great, both have stuff that sucks. No way around it just facts.
Google takes risks when developing new tech (true innovation). Apple does not, they play it safe, but they do like to make existing stuff look and feel awesome (e.g. turn by turn Navigation, 4G, and maybe next year NFC). People on both side need to stop the hate & the fan crap and be objective. At the end of the day it is all about what works better for you; and for the companies it should be about how to improve and/or invent technology that will make life easier and more convenient for the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
No, the facts are that a lot of whiners ...
Simply curious why you think Tim Cook felt he needed to apologize to Apple owners using Apple's new maps? It's not a trap question either, I'm truly interested in your personal view on why it was done. To me it seems very un-Apple-like to release a PR statement referring to a non-existent problem, and even more so to apologize for it.
Originally Posted by RichL
That screenshot looks very old.
What's that? Things can improve over time? Say it isn't so.
Cook had four options:
1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.
2. Backtrack and drop Apple Maps and get a new agreement with Google. This does the same thing - as well as gives Google even more leverage over the platform.
3. Do what Jobs did with the antennagate issue and come out with facts and evidence that every phone has the same issue and yours is actually better than most. This also inflames the haters. In addition, I doubt if anyone has sufficient evidence to make a statistically valid sample comparing the accuracy of the different maps, so it's probably not possible.
4. Tell the audience that "we're aware we're not perfect and we can do better. Here's what we're doing to address your concerns".
From a PR perspective, that takes the wind out of the sails of the Apple haters and allows Apple to continue to do what they are already working on (there are already plenty of reports of errors that have been fixed). So, regardless of what the actual facts are, the letter he sent is probably the best thing he could do to make the issue go away.
Originally Posted by jragosta
1. Do nothing and ignore the issue. This simply inflames the media and Apple haters and makes things worse.
I don't get why that would be the case. Apple did this dozens of times with Steve at the helm, and this never happened.
Steve only wrote letters when he wanted to push the human race forward. When something Apple would never do was happening or when something that didn't directly affect users was happening.
Tim doing the same would have resulted in a letter while Google was still the mapping service. In it, he would have made public the reason Apple made their own maps (Google refusing to provide turn by turn, as an example of something we still don't know), as well as their plan for the future thereof.
Doing THAT preemptively would have removed most of the legitimate complaints with the service at launch and all of the illegitimate ones. I wish he would have done that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub
Losing Google's YouTube App on iOS:
No biggie...we don't have to watch Gangnam Style
Losing Google Maps on iOS:
Millions of users in the Apple community disoriented...Apple, this is a monumental and fundamental part of what makes the iPhone or any smartphone a fledging Internet communications device. We have become so dependant on this in our daily lives and we take google maps as a feature that we pay for on iPhone having paid 1000's of dollars on products.
When the first iPhone came out, google maps was a primary feature and since then it always has been for millions of us. Now... Suddenly this smartphone is not so smart after all is it?
All we as customers want is some official statement regarding the situation so we can make calculated decisions in our own lives. The majority of users don't care about your beef with Google... We just want to know what's going to be done about this fiasco of epic proportions.
Really? REALLY??? "epic proportions"? Wow dude...you're life must be otherwise quite meaningless!
Originally Posted by gdingfrii
Come on people you're smarter than this. Ever think they just used a fake address in a similar way advertisers use fake 555 phone numbers. Everyone knows the problem exists they just made up a 555 address big deal.
I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
This just confirms the impression that most of the noise over maps on iOS 6 is coming from a Google orchestrated PR campaign that includes false and misleading ads like this one, significant shepherding of media and bloggers to "get Google's story out", and a wide-scale astroturfing campaign.
The question the media and blogosphere out to be asking is, "Is there any deception that Google will not stoop to?"
couldn't have said it better myself. Apple should sue over misleading customers. what if apple were to publish and ad stating that searching on google gives your pc a virus???
"I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made."
Okay lets go with that line of reasoning. What's more stupid using a fake address or not being able to find a real address. Or what's more stupid using one fake address in an advertisement and everyone obviously knows it's a fake address or having to spend hours putting the pins in the correct location and reporting location problems for every business in your town. The problem exists just because they used a fake address in an advertisement doesn't magically make IOS6 maps feel less stupid. Sure it may be stupid but it's just an advertisement it's not a product that someone spent money on that doesn't live up to it's goal.
Originally Posted by gdingfrii
Or what's more stupid using one fake address in an advertisement and everyone obviously knows it's a fake address…
Stop right there. Start over. Retract any assumptions about "everyone knowing" something.
Also retract any assumptions that Google Maps is infallible, and then start over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Stop right there. Start over. Retract any assumptions about "everyone knowing" something.
Also retract any assumptions that Google Maps is infallible, and then start over.
I never said google maps was infallible. Every man made device, application, etc. is fallible. And yes everyone that would be interested in this article knows that maps is a problem. When the CEO of Apple releases a statement suggesting that it's customers use a different map application or mapping website until they bring their application up to standards then I feel okay saying that everyone knows it's a problem.
Originally Posted by gdingfrii
And yes everyone that would be interested in this article knows that maps is a problem.
Then why are they advertising to everyone?
You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Then why are they advertising to everyone?
You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm sorry, no, that's not a valid excuse. Claiming your competitor sucks because it can't find something that doesn't exist is about as stupid a move as can be made.
How did I not respond to your original position: "...as stupid a move as can be made." An application that is paid for that isn't up to standard is as stupid a move as can be made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Then why are they advertising to everyone?
You've yet to answer my questions or refute my original position.
I've never seen mention on where that ad was placed other than to Moto's own page on Google+. Did Motorola publish it elsewhere or pay to have it advertised on other webpages or magazines? Just curious if anyone has seen it as an ad anywhere at all in the wild?
Originally Posted by gdingfrii
How did I not respond to your original position: "...as stupid a move as can be made."
What do you mean "how"? Making up an address and then touting how your company can find it and others cannot is not valid advertising.
An application that is paid for that isn't up to standard is as stupid a move as can be made.
Why is it always the Anti-Apple Brigade that seems to be scammed into paying for iOS updates? Because no real person had to pay for iOS 6.