My comments are based on my own observation of the maps in my own neighborhoods. Although I made no reference to Google now that you bring it up, their imagery data is substantially higher resolution and years more current than the Apple versions. If you would like, I can PM to you the GPS coordinates of the areas I'm referring to so that you can make your own evaluation.
That's exactly the point. Your comments are simply subjective anecdotes.
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. It may be an isolated data point but certainly not subjective. I also have two other data points, being my office location and my home in Central America. So I could say that Apple Maps is inferior in 3 out of 3 locations that I am familiar with.
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. ...
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Really? I must have missed the articles that, for a random representative set of locations compared Google Maps on iOS5 to Apple Maps on iOS6 and prove this. Maybe you can post the links to them? But if they're just the typical, "Maps couldn't find my house," rant, don't bother, since that doesn't meet the criteria specified. I posted a link earlier that's representative of the type of evidence that's acceptable to support such assertions, and it show quite the opposite of what you are claiming. Why don't you go read it and come back when you can provide some links that have at least that standard of proof.
Google is also working on its own next generation Google Maps that makes use of vectors, but it has a more difficult job because it is targeting several major platforms: the web, which relies upon the experimental new MapsGL enhancements of WebGL; Android, which has a native JavaME-like platform; and its existing public API, which is rooted in how Google Maps has worked in the past.
Apple can introduce entirely new technologies very rapidly because it only has to optimize for one platform: iOS Cocoa Touch. Apple isn't serving up a public web version of its own maps as Google does, so it isn't constrained by the limits of web-based technologies.
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. ...
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
As a side note notice the Park Place Security icon. That entire area is a huge business complex with office towers, hotels and restaurants which all known as Park Place. At least now I know they also have security.
Meh, Google has has map caching for a while and it is pretty useless just I expect Apple's to be, my iPhone hasn't arrived yet.
From what I understand you can't execute searches in airplane mode- so it is only helps with short data service interruptions where you want to look at the directions you brought up at some previous point when you had data.
Actually getting new directions and finding places still won't work without data. And if the caching is anything like Google's it is pretty dodgy weather the map at all the appropriate zoom levels and areal and such will be cached at all.
Nokia manages to fit all their maps on Windows phones and Garmin and other dedicated GPS nav software manage to fit their maps on all sorts of phones. Apple is running the show with their own maps now... If and when they off real offline maps it will be something to write about, but spotty caching w/o search? Sorry I can't get excited about that.
Google is also working on its own next generation Google Maps that makes use of vectors, but it has a more difficult job because it is targeting several major platforms: the web, which relies upon the experimental new MapsGL enhancements of WebGL; Android, which has a native JavaME-like platform; and its existing public API, which is rooted in how Google Maps has worked in the past.
Apple can introduce entirely new technologies very rapidly because it only has to optimize for one platform: iOS Cocoa Touch. Apple isn't serving up a public web version of its own maps as Google does, so it isn't constrained by the limits of web-based technologies.
Mmmm...
I suspect that, at some point,Apple will make a desktop Apple Maps app -- first for the Mac, then for Windows.
That would bypass "lack of browser capability" issues for many people.
As they get the bugs worked out of iOS Apple maps it should be an easy port to OS X. You can already run most iOS maps apps (or any other iOS apps) on the Mac under the iOS Simulator.
You can interact with Apple Maps Navigation through the MapKit API... AFICT, there is no interface for 3D FlyOver, yet!.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
This has been my experience with Google Maps as well. Caching doesn't work well, even its crippled functionality is unreliable bc the 'system' decides what data it 'thinks' you need. It is nothing to get excited about. It is no substitute for offline maps, which actually can be relied on and would be cool.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
"Apple's new vector maps, once loaded in San Francisco, allowed us to browse an entire continent of high level maps (state outlines) while offline, north from Anchorage, Alaska to Lima, Peru and from Honolulu, Hawaii to Montréal, Canada."
I am just not able to replicate this feature based on the article's description.
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
That was my understanding. you must first pick a routing destination (any destination) for it to start caching the route, and associated maps. I don't think it will just blindly start downloading maps just by looking at a sector on a map. That would use unnecessary data.
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
Well, if you admit that Apple Maps is as good as Google Maps, then stop your carping. Otherwise, stop changing your story.
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
Well, if you admit that Apple Maps is as good as Google Maps, then stop your carping. Otherwise, stop changing your story.
I don't think Apple maps are as accurate or as detailed as Google maps. I think the concept and the interface are innovative, however my biggest complaint has to be the much lower resolution imagery in my particular areas of interest, specifically in Central America where I am looking for land. The imagery there is horrible low res grayscale, and completely unusable. Before, in iOS 5, the quality was simply astounding.
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
As a side note notice the Park Place Security icon. That entire area is a huge business complex with office towers, hotels and restaurants which all known as Park Place. At least now I know they also have security.
I just tried the above area on my iP5...
I get standard maps displayed from MacArthur Blvd and 405 (East) to 405 merging with 5 (West) with Airplane mode on.
I can zoom out and see all of North and South America!
I think what you need to do is: zoom in and out and pan around, go into hybrid and do the same before you go into Airplane mode...
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Here's the first one that comes to mind. I'm sure there are more out there. Don't think Google Maps is perfect either, and they've had YEARS to correct mistakes.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
My comments are based on my own observation of the maps in my own neighborhoods. Although I made no reference to Google now that you bring it up, their imagery data is substantially higher resolution and years more current than the Apple versions. If you would like, I can PM to you the GPS coordinates of the areas I'm referring to so that you can make your own evaluation.
That's exactly the point. Your comments are simply subjective anecdotes.
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. It may be an isolated data point but certainly not subjective. I also have two other data points, being my office location and my home in Central America. So I could say that Apple Maps is inferior in 3 out of 3 locations that I am familiar with.
That's very grey.
Still not as ugly as Kyoto though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by el3ktro
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. ...
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Just to be clear - you have no evidence to back up your claims then?
As I have stated, the evidence is circumstantial. But, the iLost ad is pretty much a smoking gun, with Google's finger prints on it, and a confession.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Really? I must have missed the articles that, for a random representative set of locations compared Google Maps on iOS5 to Apple Maps on iOS6 and prove this. Maybe you can post the links to them? But if they're just the typical, "Maps couldn't find my house," rant, don't bother, since that doesn't meet the criteria specified. I posted a link earlier that's representative of the type of evidence that's acceptable to support such assertions, and it show quite the opposite of what you are claiming. Why don't you go read it and come back when you can provide some links that have at least that standard of proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
Then you are far behind in the world of tech.
Google has had vector maps for at least two years on android.
Typical "Apple did it first" when you know nothing about the subject.
http://googlesystem.blogspot.fr/2010/12/vector-based-google-maps-for-android.html
2010
Vector maps
Offline caching
Cache has been automatic on android for months.
http://notesofgenius.com/google-maps-offline-android/
Really in this case, Apple didn't invent a thing.
Who said anything about Apple inventing vector maps? I said they were far ahead of Google Android in regards to vector maps.
Quoted from AI article dated August 3, 2012: (http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/03/inside_apples_new_vector_based_maps_in_ios_6/page/3)
Google is also working on its own next generation Google Maps that makes use of vectors, but it has a more difficult job because it is targeting several major platforms: the web, which relies upon the experimental new MapsGL enhancements of WebGL; Android, which has a native JavaME-like platform; and its existing public API, which is rooted in how Google Maps has worked in the past.
Apple can introduce entirely new technologies very rapidly because it only has to optimize for one platform: iOS Cocoa Touch. Apple isn't serving up a public web version of its own maps as Google does, so it isn't constrained by the limits of web-based technologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
What exactly is subjective about the picture of my house being much older and much lower resolution than Google Maps version. ...
Your extrapolation from that to the conclusion that, overall, Google Maps is better. There's not objective evidence to support that. In fact, much of the objective evidence I've seen show either a mixed result or the contrary.
As I pointed out, there are other anecdotal reports in this thread that show Google Maps often sucks, too. So, what's the valid conclusion based on anecdotal reports?
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by el3ktro
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
As a side note notice the Park Place Security icon. That entire area is a huge business complex with office towers, hotels and restaurants which all known as Park Place. At least now I know they also have security.
Meh, Google has has map caching for a while and it is pretty useless just I expect Apple's to be, my iPhone hasn't arrived yet.
From what I understand you can't execute searches in airplane mode- so it is only helps with short data service interruptions where you want to look at the directions you brought up at some previous point when you had data.
Actually getting new directions and finding places still won't work without data. And if the caching is anything like Google's it is pretty dodgy weather the map at all the appropriate zoom levels and areal and such will be cached at all.
Nokia manages to fit all their maps on Windows phones and Garmin and other dedicated GPS nav software manage to fit their maps on all sorts of phones. Apple is running the show with their own maps now... If and when they off real offline maps it will be something to write about, but spotty caching w/o search? Sorry I can't get excited about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
Then you are far behind in the world of tech.
Google has had vector maps for at least two years on android.
Typical "Apple did it first" when you know nothing about the subject.
http://googlesystem.blogspot.fr/2010/12/vector-based-google-maps-for-android.html
2010
Vector maps
Offline caching
Cache has been automatic on android for months.
http://notesofgenius.com/google-maps-offline-android/
Really in this case, Apple didn't invent a thing.
Who said anything about Apple inventing vector maps? I said they were far ahead of Google Android in regards to vector maps.
Quoted from AI article dated August 3, 2012: (http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/03/inside_apples_new_vector_based_maps_in_ios_6/page/3)
Google is also working on its own next generation Google Maps that makes use of vectors, but it has a more difficult job because it is targeting several major platforms: the web, which relies upon the experimental new MapsGL enhancements of WebGL; Android, which has a native JavaME-like platform; and its existing public API, which is rooted in how Google Maps has worked in the past.
Apple can introduce entirely new technologies very rapidly because it only has to optimize for one platform: iOS Cocoa Touch. Apple isn't serving up a public web version of its own maps as Google does, so it isn't constrained by the limits of web-based technologies.
Mmmm...
I suspect that, at some point,Apple will make a desktop Apple Maps app -- first for the Mac, then for Windows.
That would bypass "lack of browser capability" issues for many people.
As they get the bugs worked out of iOS Apple maps it should be an easy port to OS X. You can already run most iOS maps apps (or any other iOS apps) on the Mac under the iOS Simulator.
You can interact with Apple Maps Navigation through the MapKit API... AFICT, there is no interface for 3D FlyOver, yet!.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
This has been my experience with Google Maps as well. Caching doesn't work well, even its crippled functionality is unreliable bc the 'system' decides what data it 'thinks' you need. It is nothing to get excited about. It is no substitute for offline maps, which actually can be relied on and would be cool.
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
"Apple's new vector maps, once loaded in San Francisco, allowed us to browse an entire continent of high level maps (state outlines) while offline, north from Anchorage, Alaska to Lima, Peru and from Honolulu, Hawaii to Montréal, Canada."
I am just not able to replicate this feature based on the article's description.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Try this. Before you drive to a new, known destination setup driving instructions. After that is accomplished turn off Cellular (and WiFi). As long as you stay mostly within the selected route it should be an enjoyable experience of directions.
The one thing I haven't tried is veering off route so that the maps could not possibly have that data cached, and then driving back on the route from a different position an seeing if the directions pick back up. I'm guessing they will.
That was my understanding. you must first pick a routing destination (any destination) for it to start caching the route, and associated maps. I don't think it will just blindly start downloading maps just by looking at a sector on a map. That would use unnecessary data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
Well, if you admit that Apple Maps is as good as Google Maps, then stop your carping. Otherwise, stop changing your story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
As you may recall I originally only made reference to the data in Apple Maps as being old without any mention of Google. You are the one trying prop up your arguments by saying Google data is sometimes just old or erroneous. I think Apple Maps is adequate for a 1.0 release. I was only pointing out the hyperbole of your statement that Apple Maps is the embodiment of where the puck will be.
Well, if you admit that Apple Maps is as good as Google Maps, then stop your carping. Otherwise, stop changing your story.
I don't think Apple maps are as accurate or as detailed as Google maps. I think the concept and the interface are innovative, however my biggest complaint has to be the much lower resolution imagery in my particular areas of interest, specifically in Central America where I am looking for land. The imagery there is horrible low res grayscale, and completely unusable. Before, in iOS 5, the quality was simply astounding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by el3ktro
I can't reproduce this. I just looked at Melbourne, Australia on Apple Maps on my iPhone. A city that I've never looked at before in maps. I let Maps sit at the default zoom level on Melbourne and waited several minutes, then turned on flight mode. I wasn't able to zoom into Melbourne (maps got blurry) and I was only able to see a little bit more than the original rectangle around Melbourne when zooming out.
Yeah I just tried it and I get nothing but blurry pixels too.
I tried on my iPad 2 and it works fine -- even got some 3D.
This what I get. This time I just turned off cellular and wifi where as last time I went into Airplane mode, but the result is the same. The i405 just disappears only a few miles from my starting point once the data connection was turned off.
As a side note notice the Park Place Security icon. That entire area is a huge business complex with office towers, hotels and restaurants which all known as Park Place. At least now I know they also have security.
I just tried the above area on my iP5...
I get standard maps displayed from MacArthur Blvd and 405 (East) to 405 merging with 5 (West) with Airplane mode on.
I can zoom out and see all of North and South America!
I think what you need to do is: zoom in and out and pan around, go into hybrid and do the same before you go into Airplane mode...
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
Apparently you are the only one having difficulties to find objective evidence to support that Gmaps has better. Every tech journalist thinks the same. There are site compiling the horrors of apple maps, why don't you make your own site compile those of gmaps?
Here's the first one that comes to mind. I'm sure there are more out there. Don't think Google Maps is perfect either, and they've had YEARS to correct mistakes.
http://googlemapsfail.tumblr.com/