The whole point of a handheld device is to carry it with interactive directions, instead of using a static paper map.
And some folks choose to forfeit the interactive part because it burns up their battery and their monthly data.
If you don't have that problem don't use the option
Also, who's to say that your mobile device always needs to be hand-held with a large (3.5 inch plus), interactive display?
There are some situations, such as hiking, where a paper map is is easier to carry, deploy, read and navigate -- and a mobile device, such as a watch phone) would provide GPS and contact with the outside world.
Does anyone here really think that this is innovative enought to warrant a patent being issued?
I don't think so. It's sad that "printing a map" qualifies for a patent. But then you have things like "hierarchical menu" which are patented, and enforceable. This was really the turn point that makes Apple patent every single thing.
I read your linked iOSx post, and it got me thinking...
Apple, could, in fact, combine the 2 OSes into one -- and still keep them separate. There have been recent enhancements to the Xcode "packaging" capabilities that facilitate separate distros from a common code base.
Question: Why can't I (shouldn't I be able to) run any iOS app on the desktop? That includes Apple Maps! iOS apps already run on Oh, Sex via the Simulator. Make the Simulator transparent and open up the Mac to the iOS ecosystem... Good for users, Good for Developers, Good for Apple, Good for Shareholders... bad for the competition!
Going the other way is somewhat more difficult -- but doable for most apps.
For certain Oh-Sex apps you need larger controls, access to the file system and multiple windows (at least 2).
Again, XCode can help! Newer Xcode features like StoryBoarding facilitate multiple, different UI layout alternatives for iPhone, iPad, iPad Mini -- why not add Macs to that list?
What I envision is an iOSx app can utilize (and expose, if necessary) the File System -- whether it be on the device or the cloud, or both. There is no reason that a Mac couldn't/shouldn't be able to act as a local iCloud over WiFi or direct attachment.
So the net of all this -- iOSx would give you:
exactly what you have now: two distinct operating environments -- if desired
more ease of use to the Mac user ala LaunchPad -- if desired
more power to the iDevice user (File System, iCloud, inter-app communication, etc.) -- if desired
portability of data between Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
portability of apps between Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
advantages to Apple and Developers of maintaining a common code base for Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
Printing maps? Har, har, har. Nothing new here so move along. Printing maps has been around for years. Apple has lost its ability to innovate so it copies what others have already done! Gingerbread RULZ!
Sincerely,
Android Fan¡
OMG!
How did you get Gingerbread? The Android smartphone I just bought has Froyo. How do I update?
I don't think so. It's sad that "printing a map" qualifies for a patent. But then you have things like "hierarchical menu" which are patented, and enforceable. This was really the turn point that makes Apple patent every single thing.
I suspect this is at least partially defensive as there is significant prior art.
Yes! I think it is innovative enough to justify a patent!
If you step back a bit...
Imagine a map you create that includes just the things you want:
some POIs shown -- others not shown
user-provided custom annotations and images
some routes highlighted -- others deemphasized (or not shown)
some selected StreetView-type images
some selected 3D Flyover type images
highlighted milestones
disproportionate (to distance) map showing navigation & milestones (Apple has a patent on this)
printed paper and/or machine-readable output (with geocodes and POIs)
machine-readable barcodes on the map.
Now, Imagine this "map" in the hands of a motel-chain, restaurant chain, etc. developer/marketeer...
I'm almost certain I'd seen a mobile-print solution for the Navigon (Garmin) navigation app. Other than printing a bar-code I think it would probably already includes the other features you mentioned. I'll see if I can check further on it.
It doesn't seem as tho Apple's patent would pass the obviousness test, but that's just my opinion. I can't imagine they'd ever try to assert it against a competitor and risk invalidation in any case. As MacBook Pro already mentioned it's likely filling a defensive role IMO.
[quote]Many of the reasons that Apple Maps is so innovative.[/quote]
Yesterday, I was playing with the Google Map Engine Beta... It allows you to personalize/customize maps... to a degree.
My purpose was to graphically illustrate to my granddaughter what a typical afternoon of her driving and "hanging out" with her friends meant in mileage -- she reimburses her mom for gas. By a few adjustments, she could cut her mileage in half (and ease the pain to her wallet).
My point is that it was a very slow and painful experience using a web app (Google Maps Engine Beta) on a loaded 2012 iMac 27... I have been playing around with custom Apple maps apps on the iPad -- and it is a lot faster and easier on the iPad -- once the custom app is written (there is no equivalent Apple Maps Customization app on the iPad).
The Google Maps Engine Beta was [B][I]good[/I][/B] for[B][I] dropping POI pins,[/I][/B] [B][I]less good[/I][/B] for[B][I] mapping routes[/I][/B] (drawing line segments), and [B][I]worthless[/I][/B] for[B][I] annotations![/I][/B]. I used preview to add annotations.
Now, Imagine Apple Maps running on a Mac (as well as an iDevice) with capability to:
[LIST] [*] drop multiple POI pins [*] automatically plot multiple routes between pins [*] annotate with lines, shapes, text, images etc. [*] automatically compute (and optionally display) distances [*] optionally display navigation instructions [/LIST]
I can see many uses for such an app, from: simple directions in a party invitation (mail or email); directions for a cross-country trip; a map for a yard sale; an overlay for an iDevice map where you could plot your progress on a trip -- say the iPad displays the map with overlay and gets periodic GPS updates from your iPhone...
Maybe not as good as Burma-Shave signs, "the wheels on the bus go round and round", "ninety-nine bottles of beer"... but it would give the kids something to do on a long trip...
Got back from two weeks in New Zealand last night. Used Apple map app on iPad to guide our rental car throughout the country, even the most remote parts. Turn-by-turn directions worked flawlessly. My only quibble is the search function, which seems not to consider your geo-location. I searched for a local American Express office while in Auckland and it placed the Danbury Connecticut office in the middle of Auckland! At other times searches for local locations, such as a MacDonalds, showed nothing, even though they are there. But turn-by-turn to an entered address or location worked great.
I'd rather see Maps built as a Service into Search which opens up a view that then can connect with Print Panel and service extend to other applications, for OS X, than launching Safari just to use a Web based view.
I read your linked iOSx post, and it got me thinking...
Apple, could, in fact, combine the 2 OSes into one -- and still keep them separate. There have been recent enhancements to the Xcode "packaging" capabilities that facilitate separate distros from a common code base.
Question: Why can't I (shouldn't I be able to) run any iOS app on the desktop? That includes Apple Maps! iOS apps already run on Oh, Sex via the Simulator. Make the Simulator transparent and open up the Mac to the iOS ecosystem... Good for users, Good for Developers, Good for Apple, Good for Shareholders... bad for the competition!
Going the other way is somewhat more difficult -- but doable for most apps.
For certain Oh-Sex apps you need larger controls, access to the file system and multiple windows (at least 2).
Again, XCode can help! Newer Xcode features like StoryBoarding facilitate multiple, different UI layout alternatives for iPhone, iPad, iPad Mini -- why not add Macs to that list?
What I envision is an iOSx app can utilize (and expose, if necessary) the File System -- whether it be on the device or the cloud, or both. There is no reason that a Mac couldn't/shouldn't be able to act as a local iCloud over WiFi or direct attachment.
So the net of all this -- iOSx would give you:
exactly what you have now: two distinct operating environments -- if desired
more ease of use to the Mac user ala LaunchPad -- if desired
more power to the iDevice user (File System, iCloud, inter-app communication, etc.) -- if desired
portability of data between Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
portability of apps between Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
advantages to Apple and Developers of maintaining a common code base for Macs, iCloud, iDevices -- if desired
A full quote... because it is exactly what I'm thinking... and I do mean... EXACTLY!
In the Fall I got interested in dev'ing mini-Apps for my clients and got a dev account. I started reading everything I could get my hands on re: xCode. Of course we "all know" (don't we???) that iOS is an optimized subset of assorted OS X Core Services and what not and shares many libraries with OS X. At the same time the main discussions re: web apps was centering on responsive design vs. mobile first design. I decided to do a combination of the 2, going "mobile first" and then scaling to responsive for tablets and desktops.
That's where this "theory" started with iOSeX. Taking the already swift and able iOS, and adding features to it rather than building out OS X any further. This is what MS truly would "like to do"... but they can't. Too much legacy baggage... and just no "balls" to dump Windows... if even for a short period of time.
Apple on the other hand started "fresh"... getting people turned on to iOS... no sexy yet due to age restrictions!... "touch", "personal", and "intimate" devices and ways of using them. SJ and Apple trained us to accept the restrictions... only to give us time to learn and feel comfortable with this "new way of computing"... before taking us on the next step and actually being willing to give up the traditional desktop metaphor.
I mean really... how bloody freakin' brilliant is THAT!?! Any "new" features added to iOS are already basically programmed (OS X) and will be greeted by literally millions of users as "Wow! Look what I can do with my iPad and iPhone!". Very unlike our little ~ 10% Mac OS X user base in the past, where it was only the die-hard fans that took notice of little improvements or added capabilities.
This new "kitty" is gonna be everyone's favorite Pet... believe me!
PS. I could run with the puns on this subject all da long.... OK.... I'll give it a rest now
Has anyone seen Scott Forstall around Apple? If I remember right, he was simply relieved of his executive position but was held as a consultant. Anyone?
I do ask because I wrote a few weeks ago that IMHO we haven't seen the last of Scott Forstall at Apple. Maybe not immediately, or even in the near future... but I do think "he'll be back" some day. Apple is in his DNA. SJ said so, good enough for me.
I'd rather see Maps built as a Service into Search which opens up a view that then can connect with Print Panel and service extend to other applications, for OS X, than launching Safari just to use a Web based view. Keep it Cocoa.
+++ I agree! Certainly better than a web-based app! And, when you think about maps -- it is the "poster child" of an OS service!
Has anyone seen Scott Forstall around Apple? If I remember right, he was simply relieved of his executive position but was held as a consultant. Anyone?
I do ask because I wrote a few weeks ago that IMHO we haven't seen the last of Scott Forstall at Apple. Maybe not immediately, or even in the near future... but I do think "he'll be back" some day. Apple is in his DNA. SJ said so, good enough for me.
That's a good question! @mdriftmeyer knows him personally -- so he might have an answer. AIR, Forstall had sold most of his AAPL (much better price than today) -- but had only been relieved of management duties -- not fired. Don't know if he voluntarily left Apple.
Apparently, like Steve Jobs, Scott did not "play well with others"... so it may have been necessary for Tim to consolidate his "power" and avoid conflicts.
That said, I always liked Scott and thought he represented Apple well -- outstanding poise and delivery (especially the humor) during presos.
Maybe both Scott and Tim have "learned" a few things...
Has anyone seen Scott Forstall around Apple? If I remember right, he was simply relieved of his executive position but was held as a consultant. Anyone?
I do ask because I wrote a few weeks ago that IMHO we haven't seen the last of Scott Forstall at Apple. Maybe not immediately, or even in the near future... but I do think "he'll be back" some day. Apple is in his DNA. SJ said so, good enough for me.
To be more precise, NeXT is in Scott's DNA and Apple is just NeXT 2.0. And yes, there is a deep history of returning more than once to NeXT/Apple Engineering for top talents who go off and create some start up and later return.
Wonder if it's the same one? It's a good idea - pervasive data is one thing, but you can almost always suffer from bad latency - a pre-stored map route on your system would be as responsive as the GPS.
I wish they'd add the possibility to create waypoints and itineraries directly on iOS devices and Macs and add a feature allowing to retrace one's movements directly within the app, giving altimetry, distance and other useful stuff. I would have loved both of these features during a recent trip and I didn't want to use an app.
This would make more sense if Apple Maps ran on desktops with printers.
The whole point of a handheld device is to carry it with interactive directions, instead of using a static paper map.
Well obviously, but it would simplify the less than 1% chance of your address being weird when entered so you enter backwards directions to it and print it,then send it to other devices.
Also, add the ability to print the map...in map form, like a foldable map. Google doesn't have that and when you spend a lot of time preparing a custom itinerary with waypoints and personalized points of interest it would be nice to allow for the printing of a map that can be folded.
Comments
Also, who's to say that your mobile device always needs to be hand-held with a large (3.5 inch plus), interactive display?
There are some situations, such as hiking, where a paper map is is easier to carry, deploy, read and navigate -- and a mobile device, such as a watch phone) would provide GPS and contact with the outside world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb
Does anyone here really think that this is innovative enought to warrant a patent being issued?
I don't think so. It's sad that "printing a map" qualifies for a patent. But then you have things like "hierarchical menu" which are patented, and enforceable. This was really the turn point that makes Apple patent every single thing.
I read your linked iOSx post, and it got me thinking...
Apple, could, in fact, combine the 2 OSes into one -- and still keep them separate. There have been recent enhancements to the Xcode "packaging" capabilities that facilitate separate distros from a common code base.
Question: Why can't I (shouldn't I be able to) run any iOS app on the desktop? That includes Apple Maps! iOS apps already run on Oh, Sex via the Simulator. Make the Simulator transparent and open up the Mac to the iOS ecosystem... Good for users, Good for Developers, Good for Apple, Good for Shareholders... bad for the competition!
Going the other way is somewhat more difficult -- but doable for most apps.
For certain Oh-Sex apps you need larger controls, access to the file system and multiple windows (at least 2).
Again, XCode can help! Newer Xcode features like StoryBoarding facilitate multiple, different UI layout alternatives for iPhone, iPad, iPad Mini -- why not add Macs to that list?
What I envision is an iOSx app can utilize (and expose, if necessary) the File System -- whether it be on the device or the cloud, or both. There is no reason that a Mac couldn't/shouldn't be able to act as a local iCloud over WiFi or direct attachment.
So the net of all this -- iOSx would give you:
OMG!
How did you get Gingerbread? The Android smartphone I just bought has Froyo. How do I update?
Yes! I think it is innovative enough to justify a patent!
If you step back a bit...
Imagine a map you create that includes just the things you want:
Now, Imagine this "map" in the hands of a motel-chain, restaurant chain, etc. developer/marketeer...
I suspect this is at least partially defensive as there is significant prior art.
Many of the reasons that Apple Maps is so innovative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Yes! I think it is innovative enough to justify a patent!
If you step back a bit...
Imagine a map you create that includes just the things you want:
some POIs shown -- others not shown
user-provided custom annotations and images
some routes highlighted -- others deemphasized (or not shown)
some selected StreetView-type images
some selected 3D Flyover type images
highlighted milestones
disproportionate (to distance) map showing navigation & milestones (Apple has a patent on this)
printed paper and/or machine-readable output (with geocodes and POIs)
machine-readable barcodes on the map.
Now, Imagine this "map" in the hands of a motel-chain, restaurant chain, etc. developer/marketeer...
I'm almost certain I'd seen a mobile-print solution for the Navigon (Garmin) navigation app. Other than printing a bar-code I think it would probably already includes the other features you mentioned. I'll see if I can check further on it.
It doesn't seem as tho Apple's patent would pass the obviousness test, but that's just my opinion. I can't imagine they'd ever try to assert it against a competitor and risk invalidation in any case. As MacBook Pro already mentioned it's likely filling a defensive role IMO.
Yesterday, I was playing with the Google Map Engine Beta... It allows you to personalize/customize maps... to a degree.
My purpose was to graphically illustrate to my granddaughter what a typical afternoon of her driving and "hanging out" with her friends meant in mileage -- she reimburses her mom for gas. By a few adjustments, she could cut her mileage in half (and ease the pain to her wallet).
My point is that it was a very slow and painful experience using a web app (Google Maps Engine Beta) on a loaded 2012 iMac 27... I have been playing around with custom Apple maps apps on the iPad -- and it is a lot faster and easier on the iPad -- once the custom app is written (there is no equivalent Apple Maps Customization app on the iPad).
The Google Maps Engine Beta was [B][I]good[/I][/B] for[B][I] dropping POI pins,[/I][/B] [B][I]less good[/I][/B] for[B][I] mapping routes[/I][/B] (drawing line segments), and [B][I]worthless[/I][/B] for[B][I] annotations![/I][/B]. I used preview to add annotations.
Now, Imagine Apple Maps running on a Mac (as well as an iDevice) with capability to:
[LIST]
[*] drop multiple POI pins
[*] automatically plot multiple routes between pins
[*] annotate with lines, shapes, text, images etc.
[*] automatically compute (and optionally display) distances
[*] optionally display navigation instructions
[/LIST]
I can see many uses for such an app, from: simple directions in a party invitation (mail or email); directions for a cross-country trip; a map for a yard sale; an overlay for an iDevice map where you could plot your progress on a trip -- say the iPad displays the map with overlay and gets periodic GPS updates from your iPhone...
Maybe not as good as Burma-Shave signs, "the wheels on the bus go round and round", "ninety-nine bottles of beer"... but it would give the kids something to do on a long trip...
Are we there, yet?
Keep it Cocoa.
A full quote... because it is exactly what I'm thinking... and I do mean... EXACTLY!
In the Fall I got interested in dev'ing mini-Apps for my clients and got a dev account. I started reading everything I could get my hands on re: xCode. Of course we "all know" (don't we???) that iOS is an optimized subset of assorted OS X Core Services and what not and shares many libraries with OS X. At the same time the main discussions re: web apps was centering on responsive design vs. mobile first design. I decided to do a combination of the 2, going "mobile first" and then scaling to responsive for tablets and desktops.
That's where this "theory" started with iOSeX. Taking the already swift and able iOS, and adding features to it rather than building out OS X any further. This is what MS truly would "like to do"... but they can't. Too much legacy baggage... and just no "balls" to dump Windows... if even for a short period of time.
Apple on the other hand started "fresh"... getting people turned on to iOS... no sexy yet due to age restrictions!... "touch", "personal", and "intimate" devices and ways of using them. SJ and Apple trained us to accept the restrictions... only to give us time to learn and feel comfortable with this "new way of computing"... before taking us on the next step and actually being willing to give up the traditional desktop metaphor.
I mean really... how bloody freakin' brilliant is THAT!?! Any "new" features added to iOS are already basically programmed (OS X) and will be greeted by literally millions of users as "Wow! Look what I can do with my iPad and iPhone!". Very unlike our little ~ 10% Mac OS X user base in the past, where it was only the die-hard fans that took notice of little improvements or added capabilities.
This new "kitty" is gonna be everyone's favorite Pet... believe me!
PS. I could run with the puns on this subject all da long.... OK.... I'll give it a rest now
Has anyone seen Scott Forstall around Apple? If I remember right, he was simply relieved of his executive position but was held as a consultant. Anyone?
I do ask because I wrote a few weeks ago that IMHO we haven't seen the last of Scott Forstall at Apple. Maybe not immediately, or even in the near future... but I do think "he'll be back" some day. Apple is in his DNA. SJ said so, good enough for me.
+++ I agree! Certainly better than a web-based app! And, when you think about maps -- it is the "poster child" of an OS service!
That's a good question! @mdriftmeyer knows him personally -- so he might have an answer. AIR, Forstall had sold most of his AAPL (much better price than today) -- but had only been relieved of management duties -- not fired. Don't know if he voluntarily left Apple.
Apparently, like Steve Jobs, Scott did not "play well with others"... so it may have been necessary for Tim to consolidate his "power" and avoid conflicts.
That said, I always liked Scott and thought he represented Apple well -- outstanding poise and delivery (especially the humor) during presos.
Maybe both Scott and Tim have "learned" a few things...
As it pertains to maps:
Has anyone seen Scott Forstall around Apple? If I remember right, he was simply relieved of his executive position but was held as a consultant. Anyone?
I do ask because I wrote a few weeks ago that IMHO we haven't seen the last of Scott Forstall at Apple. Maybe not immediately, or even in the near future... but I do think "he'll be back" some day. Apple is in his DNA. SJ said so, good enough for me.
To be more precise, NeXT is in Scott's DNA and Apple is just NeXT 2.0. And yes, there is a deep history of returning more than once to NeXT/Apple Engineering for top talents who go off and create some start up and later return.http://appleinsider.com/articles/08/02/14/apple_seeks_patent_on_podmaps_concept
Wonder if it's the same one? It's a good idea - pervasive data is one thing, but you can almost always suffer from bad latency - a pre-stored map route on your system would be as responsive as the GPS.
Google doesn't have that and when you spend a lot of time preparing a custom itinerary with waypoints and personalized points of interest it would be nice to allow for the printing of a map that can be folded.