This is VERY useful for my travels, often find myself in European cities where im quite limited in google maps to get a sufficient map size in my cache to use offline
With that said, I find it kinda sad that we seem to constantly need to fight one another, guard our little discoveries rather than sharing something for the good of all. Imagine Google and Apple and Nokia working together on a map that would incorporate everything we need!
As a scientist, I find this corporate mentality rather stiffling, though I suppose necessary for corporations to claw up over one another. It does support innovation I guess, but in a very non efficient way! Imaging if we used this approach with the genome project! We'd still be working on it, hiding things from each other.
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
I did just as you mentioned and I even tried it again right now but it does not work for me. By zooming out to the continent view I was able to see the state outlines but the content of the area is just blurry pixels at any zoom level.
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.
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
Doesn't it make sense that Google has more data (counting points of interest), so a more cumbersome method for caching is needed, but that as memory gets cheaper and simultaneously more abundant, Google will naturally migrate to automated caching like that described for Apple Maps? Otherwise Google and Nokia are both using vector graphics already--Apple has only achieved parity on that.
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
I did just as you mentioned and I even tried it again right now but it does not work for me. By zooming out to the continent view I was able to see the state outlines but the content of the area is just blurry pixels at any zoom level.
Do you have any other iDevice with iOS 6? It works for me on anything from a iP 4S, iPad 2, iPad 3... the iP4 phones are with the grandkids at school. so I can't try them.
Come to think of it... caching works through a hard reset (power OFF/ON)... so it stands to reason that caching is in the SSD. Therefore, the amount of caching may be related to the size of the SSD and the amount available. I would bet the Apple Maps app checks SSD availability and adjusts caching accordingly.
I did just as you mentioned and I even tried it again right now but it does not work for me. By zooming out to the continent view I was able to see the state outlines but the content of the area is just blurry pixels at any zoom level.
Put in a route from that point of origin to somewhere?
Well, not if you keep making unfounded assertions with no factual or logical basis. I'll keep pointing out that you don't know what you are talking about, just like the good old days when you told us Flash would rule forever and I told you you were wrong.
The iPhone is premium product and so people expect a premium experience. The great thing about the original iPhone was that it didn't try to do everything - instead it focused on the basics. It gave you the best phone, the best e-mail client, the best music player and the best web browser. Other phones can better cameras or more features, but that didn't matter to iPhone users.
The new Apple Maps app seems to focus new features over the basics. The fundamental features, especially when outside of the US and China, are a significant step backwards. A lot of aerial photography is B&W, obscured by clouds or doesn't zoom in very far. Places are mislabeled and major landmarks aren't labelled at all. Instead, we've got some highly advanced new features that are let down by poor basic features. Turn-by-turn navigation is great but doesn't work so well when it tries to route me via a pedestrian footpath.
It feels unfinished. If people want to be beta testers, they can buy a cheaper Android device.
This topic is boring now though. Virtually every other site has moved on. I think it's time for AI to move on.
Apple already perfected the basic features on the iPhone, what were they supposed to do, leave it at that and call it a day? They needed to branch out to maintain the premium branding as other cell phones began adding more features. Cameras became important as many people use them as their only camera. The maps had to be redone and brought in-house so that Apple could have more of a say in their advancement. Growing pains aside for some users, others embrace the turn-by-turn navigation that has been missing since inception of the original iPhone. Newer features and improvements can now be added to the app on a more frequent basis, as they are not tied to Google's time table. There is nothing but upside to this, especially longer term. Not saying that it is perfect in all use cases, as illustrated by your issues, however there are many people with no issues as well. Google was always going to keep the iOS version a step behind for various reasons so Apple took control of their own destiny so to speak. I agree with your opinion regarding this topic. People have spoken their peace, Apple has issued a statement and is working to improve the app so it is time to move on.
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.
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
I disagree with you. End of discussion.
C'mon guys...
It is fairly easy to go into satellite view with Apple Maps and find gray areas or cloudy, brown or gray areas -- especially outside of the US... Try Ronda Spain, or JungFrauJoch Switzerland...
The Google Satellite images are better in these areas. I have compared areas of Central and South America -- Usually google maps is superior when you zoom in over the countryside (outside of major population areas). Even tourist attractions like Machu Picchu, Nasca Lines or Cuzco.
But there are some areas like Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe that are superior in Apple maps -- especially in 3D.
Finally, even some of the bad areas of Apple maps work quite well in 3D -- giving better result (for some purposes) than superior Google Maps satellite images...
It all depends on what you are trying to do.
As I've posted on other map threads, if superior satellite images are available (for hire) I expect that Apple will incorporate them at the earliest moment. However, it may be somewhat difficult to integrate them with the other data components (vector map data, vector image data, navigation data, POI data, transportation data).
And for Street View, I'll say it again: Nokia has something Apple wants: Naviteq street view -- Apple has something Nokia wants: C3 Technologies FlyOver view... seems like these two could work out a mutually beneficial arrangement... the enemy of my enemy...
These articles prove that for areas where the data exists and is accurate, iOS 6 maps are competitive, and will likely evolve into the category leader.
It still doesn't change the fact however, that all you Americans doing your web reports and blogs about maps are looking at things through the wrong end of a telescope. With few exceptions, when you step across the US border ... almost all the data is pure shit.
Fact: Maps won't really be usable by the rest of the world for at least a year or two.
(just as Siri is only just getting basic functionality outside of the US a full year after it's debut)
My advice to the privileged Americans, is to stop expecting the rest of the world to agree with you that maps is great, because it just isn't and won't be for a long, long, time. This is not some minor hiccup. In most cases, it's the loss of almost all navigation ability for a period of years for iOS users who don't happen to be Americans.
Speak for yourself.
FYI, the examples I posted are from Australia, which is not a part of the US.
The best they'd be is in a dead-heat. They both offer mobile vector mapping for their respective platforms. Neither currently has vector mapping on the desktop nor for their competitors platforms. I don't see how you decided Apple is far ahead.
FWIW the AI article you're quoting from is less than clear that the comments made concerning Google delivering raster and Apple offering vector mapping applied only to Apple's platform. Google has been offering Android users vector maps for a couple of years as mentioned by many others.
FWIW the AI article you're quoting from is less than clear that the comments made concerning Google delivering raster and Apple offering vector mapping applied only to Apple's platform. Google has been offering Android users vector maps for a couple of years as mentioned by many others.
Which is why Apple's decision to distance themselves from relying on Google is the right thing to do, teething troubles and all.
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.
First, that appears to be a problem with TomTom data, or, more likely, Apple not interpreting TomTom data properly. If you go to Hybrid view. "Park Place" appears in all its glory.
Second, thank you for bringing back some memories...
My family moved from St. Louis Park (Minneapolis) to Pasadena in 1951 (I was 12).
The family across the street in St. Louis Park moved to Santa Ana in late 1952 (boys 8, 11 1nd 14).
Another friend had moved from St. Louis Park to Oshkosh [b'gosh] WI in 1952 (a boy my age).
In 1953, the friend from Oshkosh was a Boy Scout and was going to attend the Boy Scout Jamboree near Santa Ana in July, 1953.
I wanted to go stay with my friends in Santa Ana and visit my other friend at the Jamboree.
My parents said no!
Long story short, being a stupid, heard-headed 13-year-old, I ran away and rode my bike the 30 some miles from Pasadena to Anaheim (some of it on the freeway). When I got to Anaheim, the family called my parents -- they relented and let me stay the week.
When I was trying to duplicate your Apple Maps caching problem, the name "Jamboree Rd" on the map you posted gave me pause...
...I wonder...
There was no City of Irvine at that time -- just the privately held Irvine Ranch.
The "Jamboree" was held on some rolling hills overlooking the ocean... The location is now called "Fashion Island".
There was no City of Irvine at that time -- just the privately held Irvine Ranch.
The "Jamboree" was held on some rolling hills overlooking the ocean... The location is now called "Fashion Island".
The 1953 National Scout Jamboree of the Boy Scouts of America held its event where Newport Center and Fashion Island now sit. It was the third national jamboree, the first to be held west of the Mississippi River, and had 50,000 scouts from all 50 states and 16 foreign countries.[1] Thousands of tents were pitched in the area accessible only by a muddy two-lane trail called Palisades Road (part of which is now the southern end of Bristol Avenue). The road was soon paved, and later the name was changed to Jamboree Road in honor of the event.
Before Jamboree Road was a blacktopped six-lane road, it was two lanes of gravel. In 1953, The Irvine Co. built the road to provide access to and from the Boy Scout National Jamboree, which drew in 50,000 Boy Scouts from every state and 16 foreign countries. Jamboree Road was built to connect "Tent City," which consisted of 25,000 tents, with the Irvine Ranch Scout Troop 36 Clubhouse near what is now Irvine Boulevard and Myford Road. During the Jamboree, the Scouts consumed 600,000 quarts of milk and 170,000 loaves of bread. Bob Hope, Danny Kaye and Roy Rogers stopped by to entertain.
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!
I'm pretty sure that vector maps are only available on iPhone 4S and above. My girlfriend has an iPhone 4 and her maps also go blurry when you zoom in with data off.
This also means that Apple could easily provide a web version of their maps using static map tiles, as they seem to have those readily available.
....For Apple to have been prematurely voluble and transparent would have slowed to a crawl, and thus gravely imperiled, usage-centric, Maps/Siri-platform development...
I can accept that this is what Apple may have thought before the release. Thus, instead of being voluble and transparent, they were reticent and opaque (some would say misleadingly). In hindsight that appears to have been a poor choice with regard to the effect on Maps/Siri platform development. Loyal Apple customers would have been willing to do their part to improve mapping data, no matter the pre-release pose. Potential new customers, believing the hysteria, may now never give the Apple platform a chance.
Comments
With that said, I find it kinda sad that we seem to constantly need to fight one another, guard our little discoveries rather than sharing something for the good of all. Imagine Google and Apple and Nokia working together on a map that would incorporate everything we need!
As a scientist, I find this corporate mentality rather stiffling, though I suppose necessary for corporations to claw up over one another. It does support innovation I guess, but in a very non efficient way!
Imaging if we used this approach with the genome project! We'd still be working on it, hiding things from each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
I did just as you mentioned and I even tried it again right now but it does not work for me. By zooming out to the continent view I was able to see the state outlines but the content of the area is just blurry pixels at any zoom level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
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.
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
Doesn't it make sense that Google has more data (counting points of interest), so a more cumbersome method for caching is needed, but that as memory gets cheaper and simultaneously more abundant, Google will naturally migrate to automated caching like that described for Apple Maps? Otherwise Google and Nokia are both using vector graphics already--Apple has only achieved parity on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
I disagree with you. End of discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
This primes the cache... I'm kinda' surprised you didn't experiment with that!
I did just as you mentioned and I even tried it again right now but it does not work for me. By zooming out to the continent view I was able to see the state outlines but the content of the area is just blurry pixels at any zoom level.
Do you have any other iDevice with iOS 6? It works for me on anything from a iP 4S, iPad 2, iPad 3... the iP4 phones are with the grandkids at school. so I can't try them.
Come to think of it... caching works through a hard reset (power OFF/ON)... so it stands to reason that caching is in the SSD. Therefore, the amount of caching may be related to the size of the SSD and the amount available. I would bet the Apple Maps app checks SSD availability and adjusts caching accordingly.
Put in a route from that point of origin to somewhere?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I disagree with you. End of discussion.
Well, not if you keep making unfounded assertions with no factual or logical basis. I'll keep pointing out that you don't know what you are talking about, just like the good old days when you told us Flash would rule forever and I told you you were wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
The iPhone is premium product and so people expect a premium experience. The great thing about the original iPhone was that it didn't try to do everything - instead it focused on the basics. It gave you the best phone, the best e-mail client, the best music player and the best web browser. Other phones can better cameras or more features, but that didn't matter to iPhone users.
The new Apple Maps app seems to focus new features over the basics. The fundamental features, especially when outside of the US and China, are a significant step backwards. A lot of aerial photography is B&W, obscured by clouds or doesn't zoom in very far. Places are mislabeled and major landmarks aren't labelled at all. Instead, we've got some highly advanced new features that are let down by poor basic features. Turn-by-turn navigation is great but doesn't work so well when it tries to route me via a pedestrian footpath.
It feels unfinished. If people want to be beta testers, they can buy a cheaper Android device.
This topic is boring now though. Virtually every other site has moved on. I think it's time for AI to move on.
Apple already perfected the basic features on the iPhone, what were they supposed to do, leave it at that and call it a day? They needed to branch out to maintain the premium branding as other cell phones began adding more features. Cameras became important as many people use them as their only camera. The maps had to be redone and brought in-house so that Apple could have more of a say in their advancement. Growing pains aside for some users, others embrace the turn-by-turn navigation that has been missing since inception of the original iPhone. Newer features and improvements can now be added to the app on a more frequent basis, as they are not tied to Google's time table. There is nothing but upside to this, especially longer term. Not saying that it is perfect in all use cases, as illustrated by your issues, however there are many people with no issues as well. Google was always going to keep the iOS version a step behind for various reasons so Apple took control of their own destiny so to speak. I agree with your opinion regarding this topic. People have spoken their peace, Apple has issued a statement and is working to improve the app so it is time to move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
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.
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
The evidence you offer doesn't support your belief, except perhaps for your own idiosyncratic purposes. But, first you're saying something, then you aren't, now you are again. Make up your mind.
I disagree with you. End of discussion.
C'mon guys...
It is fairly easy to go into satellite view with Apple Maps and find gray areas or cloudy, brown or gray areas -- especially outside of the US... Try Ronda Spain, or JungFrauJoch Switzerland...
The Google Satellite images are better in these areas. I have compared areas of Central and South America -- Usually google maps is superior when you zoom in over the countryside (outside of major population areas). Even tourist attractions like Machu Picchu, Nasca Lines or Cuzco.
But there are some areas like Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe that are superior in Apple maps -- especially in 3D.
Finally, even some of the bad areas of Apple maps work quite well in 3D -- giving better result (for some purposes) than superior Google Maps satellite images...
It all depends on what you are trying to do.
As I've posted on other map threads, if superior satellite images are available (for hire) I expect that Apple will incorporate them at the earliest moment. However, it may be somewhat difficult to integrate them with the other data components (vector map data, vector image data, navigation data, POI data, transportation data).
And for Street View, I'll say it again: Nokia has something Apple wants: Naviteq street view -- Apple has something Nokia wants: C3 Technologies FlyOver view... seems like these two could work out a mutually beneficial arrangement... the enemy of my enemy...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
These articles prove that for areas where the data exists and is accurate, iOS 6 maps are competitive, and will likely evolve into the category leader.
It still doesn't change the fact however, that all you Americans doing your web reports and blogs about maps are looking at things through the wrong end of a telescope. With few exceptions, when you step across the US border ... almost all the data is pure shit.
Fact: Maps won't really be usable by the rest of the world for at least a year or two.
(just as Siri is only just getting basic functionality outside of the US a full year after it's debut)
My advice to the privileged Americans, is to stop expecting the rest of the world to agree with you that maps is great, because it just isn't and won't be for a long, long, time. This is not some minor hiccup. In most cases, it's the loss of almost all navigation ability for a period of years for iOS users who don't happen to be Americans.
Speak for yourself.
FYI, the examples I posted are from Australia, which is not a part of the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
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)
The best they'd be is in a dead-heat. They both offer mobile vector mapping for their respective platforms. Neither currently has vector mapping on the desktop nor for their competitors platforms. I don't see how you decided Apple is far ahead.
FWIW the AI article you're quoting from is less than clear that the comments made concerning Google delivering raster and Apple offering vector mapping applied only to Apple's platform. Google has been offering Android users vector maps for a couple of years as mentioned by many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
FWIW the AI article you're quoting from is less than clear that the comments made concerning Google delivering raster and Apple offering vector mapping applied only to Apple's platform. Google has been offering Android users vector maps for a couple of years as mentioned by many others.
Which is why Apple's decision to distance themselves from relying on Google is the right thing to do, teething troubles and all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Which is why Apple's decision to distance themselves from relying on Google is the right thing to do, teething troubles and all.
I agree with you.
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.
First, that appears to be a problem with TomTom data, or, more likely, Apple not interpreting TomTom data properly. If you go to Hybrid view. "Park Place" appears in all its glory.
Second, thank you for bringing back some memories...
My family moved from St. Louis Park (Minneapolis) to Pasadena in 1951 (I was 12).
The family across the street in St. Louis Park moved to Santa Ana in late 1952 (boys 8, 11 1nd 14).
Another friend had moved from St. Louis Park to Oshkosh [b'gosh] WI in 1952 (a boy my age).
In 1953, the friend from Oshkosh was a Boy Scout and was going to attend the Boy Scout Jamboree near Santa Ana in July, 1953.
I wanted to go stay with my friends in Santa Ana and visit my other friend at the Jamboree.
My parents said no!
Long story short, being a stupid, heard-headed 13-year-old, I ran away and rode my bike the 30 some miles from Pasadena to Anaheim (some of it on the freeway). When I got to Anaheim, the family called my parents -- they relented and let me stay the week.
When I was trying to duplicate your Apple Maps caching problem, the name "Jamboree Rd" on the map you posted gave me pause...
...I wonder...
There was no City of Irvine at that time -- just the privately held Irvine Ranch.
The "Jamboree" was held on some rolling hills overlooking the ocean... The location is now called "Fashion Island".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
There was no City of Irvine at that time -- just the privately held Irvine Ranch.
The "Jamboree" was held on some rolling hills overlooking the ocean... The location is now called "Fashion Island".
The 1953 National Scout Jamboree of the Boy Scouts of America held its event where Newport Center and Fashion Island now sit. It was the third national jamboree, the first to be held west of the Mississippi River, and had 50,000 scouts from all 50 states and 16 foreign countries.[1] Thousands of tents were pitched in the area accessible only by a muddy two-lane trail called Palisades Road (part of which is now the southern end of Bristol Avenue). The road was soon paved, and later the name was changed to Jamboree Road in honor of the event.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamboree_Road
Before Jamboree Road was a blacktopped six-lane road, it was two lanes of gravel. In 1953, The Irvine Co. built the road to provide access to and from the Boy Scout National Jamboree, which drew in 50,000 Boy Scouts from every state and 16 foreign countries. Jamboree Road was built to connect "Tent City," which consisted of 25,000 tents, with the Irvine Ranch Scout Troop 36 Clubhouse near what is now Irvine Boulevard and Myford Road. During the Jamboree, the Scouts consumed 600,000 quarts of milk and 170,000 loaves of bread. Bob Hope, Danny Kaye and Roy Rogers stopped by to entertain.
Source:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/jamboree-50401-road-irvine.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
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!
I'm pretty sure that vector maps are only available on iPhone 4S and above. My girlfriend has an iPhone 4 and her maps also go blurry when you zoom in with data off.
This also means that Apple could easily provide a web version of their maps using static map tiles, as they seem to have those readily available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berp
....For Apple to have been prematurely voluble and transparent would have slowed to a crawl, and thus gravely imperiled, usage-centric, Maps/Siri-platform development...
I can accept that this is what Apple may have thought before the release. Thus, instead of being voluble and transparent, they were reticent and opaque (some would say misleadingly). In hindsight that appears to have been a poor choice with regard to the effect on Maps/Siri platform development. Loyal Apple customers would have been willing to do their part to improve mapping data, no matter the pre-release pose. Potential new customers, believing the hysteria, may now never give the Apple platform a chance.