I can accept Apple Maps' 1.0 performance, if Apple wasn't intent on removing Google's MUCH more evolved performance.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

I can accept Apple Maps' 1.0 performance, if Apple wasn't intent on removing Google's MUCH more evolved performance.

They haven't.

maps.google.com works great (looks like shit, though). :p

You of electronics tea know full we'll by now that it is all FUD. You have tried it out yourselves and know it works. I dare you to post a search criteria you used that failed miserably in iMacs.

I tried NYC, Hoboken, Austin and Manila (in the PI) and it works superbly.

Off course shyster is as shyster does.

Works for me. I like having turn by turn voice navigation which we were never ever to get on iOS from Google. Nobody seems to fault Google maps for that omission. Just like antennagate, a hyped-up controversy.

Amazing how one app out of hundreds of thousands, in version 1.0, can bring out the jealousy. It seems that the world's fastest handset, which stomps the competition to a pulp, simply confounds Samsung and Nokia. Heck, Samsung seems more to be saying that we WISH everyone would be willing to queue up in huge numbers for our equipment.

Originally Posted by ToyGuy

Amazing how one app out of hundreds of thousands, in version 1.0, can bring out the jealousy. It seems that the world's fastest handset, which stomps the competition to a pulp, simply confounds Samsung and Nokia. Heck, Samsung seems more to be saying that we WISH everyone would be willing to queue up in huge numbers for our equipment.

]It will get worse, the jealous pseudo-gripes that is, even as the app's performance gets better and better.

The next phase in this odious campaign, mark my words, will be spiteful suggestions of rifts within the star-studded product development teams, all squarely aimed at (iOS software supremo) Scott Forstall and "said to involve" (hardware design VP) Jon Ives.

As fjose1929 commented earlier in this thread: "shyster is as shyster does".

Wait for it.

Here's hoping the high-flying young Apple execs, who are doing a fantastic synergistic job, can see through the vicious subterfuge to come, and rise above it.

Originally Posted by fmlogue


Works for me. I like having turn by turn voice navigation which we were never ever to get on iOS from Google. Nobody seems to fault Google maps for that omission. Just like antennagate, a hyped-up controversy.

Why would it have never been possible? That's what I would like to understand...

Jesus,
a bunch of fanboys can't understand that iphone users had a map app which was very detailed and simply did its job.
Not, let me quote Apple:

Apple-designed from the ground up (and the sky down), this built-in app shows you incredible detail — even on full zoom. Maps keeps street names where they belong and keeps you heading in the right direction with spoken turn-by-turn navigation and real-time traffic updates.

I did the bold. So, fanboys, this is what Apple writes on its web page. And it's clear false advertising. Please, shut up with your "this is a 1.0 version" bullshit. The "incredible detail" in a lot of cases all around the world appears to make whole cities to a dessert. I don't understand your mind where you have to defend every poop coming from Apple as the best thing that ever happened to the mankind. Praise Apple when they do their job, but don't defend something that is obviously a complete failure at this time.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

I can accept Apple Maps' 1.0 performance, if Apple wasn't intent on removing Google's MUCH more evolved performance.

Apple wasn't intent on removing it, the Apple-google contract wasn't renewed. Google was holding back key features, like turn-by-turn GPS (only for Android), so Apple went with an alternative company, OpenStreetMaps and TomTom (and Yelp for the business listings).

Originally Posted by mojkarma


Jesus,
a bunch of fanboys can't understand that iphone users had a map app which was very detailed and simply did its job.
Not, let me quote Apple:
I did the bold. So, fanboys, this is what Apple writes on its web page. And it's clear false advertising. Please, shut up with your "this is a 1.0 version" bullshit. The "incredible detail" in a lot of cases all around the world appears to make whole cities to a dessert. I don't understand your mind where you have to defend every poop coming from Apple as the best thing that ever happened to the mankind. Praise Apple when they do their job, but don't defend something that is obviously a complete failure at this time.

False advertising, or just usual Apple marketing hyperbole? This is nothing new.

Originally Posted by mr100percent



Apple wasn't intent on removing it, the Apple-google contract wasn't renewed. Google was holding back key features, like turn-by-turn GPS (only for Android), so Apple went with an alternative company, OpenStreetMaps and TomTom (and Yelp for the business listings).

But this doesn't make sense. The Google Maps API is documented, all of Google's APIs are well-documented. Unless you can claim that Google has been using undocumented parts of their API, I don't see why Apple couldn't have modified their app they distribute with iOS to support turn-by-turn.

I think this was more of a power grab, Apple felt it was a liability for Google to control this part of their business.

Originally Posted by besson3c

[QUOTE name="mr100percent" url="/t/492804/apple-competitors-toss-barbs-over-ios-6-map-troubles#post_4192504"]
Apple wasn't intent on removing it, the Apple-google contract wasn't renewed. Google was holding back key features, like turn-by-turn GPS (only for Android), so Apple went with an alternative company, OpenStreetMaps and TomTom (and Yelp for the business listings).

But this doesn't make sense. The Google Maps API is documented, all of Google's APIs are well-documented. Unless you can claim that Google has been using undocumented parts of their API, I don't see why Apple couldn't have modified their app they distribute with iOS to support turn-by-turn.[/quote]

Because they weren't licensed to do so under their contract?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot




Because they weren't licensed to do so under their contract?

I guess that's a reasonable theory, although a little weird that they would prevent Apple from writing their own code that would take advantage of these parts of Google's API. Besides, now that the contract has expired, why couldn't have Apple have went ahead with these additions if it were about contracts?

Besson, how does content licensing work on the planet where you live?

Are you drunk?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot


Besson, how does content licensing work on the planet where you live?
Are you drunk?

There is no need for this rudeness. Is this really subject matter worth getting emotional over?

Google doesn't seem to charge for their content, they charge for access to their API and the web services that their API interacts with:

https://developers.google.com/maps/licensing


If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but again, no need to be a dick about it. We're just having a conversation, or so I thought.

Google Maps Terms of Service

(c) No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.



Also, this gem:

1.5 Changes to the Terms. Google reserves the right to make changes to the Terms from time to time. When these changes are made, Google will make a new copy of the Terms available at http://code.google.com/apis/maps/terms.html (or such successor URLs that Google may designate from time to time). You understand and agree that if you use the Service after the date on which the Terms have changed, Google will treat your use as acceptance of the updated Terms. If a modification is unacceptable to you, you may terminate this agreement by ceasing use of the Maps API(s).

This is on a core feature of Apple's single most important device.

Terms dictated by a direct business competitor.

Hm.

Interesting find, I guess that answers this.

I wonder if this Google stipulation is a partial avoidance of liability issue for them? I mean, when you get into turn-by-turn you get into all of those in-car GPS devices, many of which I'd imagine don't have an uplink (or a reliable uplink) to update map data. If this is so, Google would not be able to provide QA.

Yes, the Google Maps API is well-documented and supports all features of the previous Google Maps app for iOS.

The problem is that it's only free for casual developers/users -- usage is capped (like geocode requests, which happens every time you "find" a location in the maps app) and there are restrictions on how you can use the API if you're using it for free.

To gain unlimited (or sufficiently high) API usage, one must pay for the "enterprise" Google Maps API license, which is not cheap -- for Apple, maybe, but it would be on a device-by-device basis, and I don't see Apple plopping down $2,000 to $20,000 per year for each iPhone it sells just to license Google Maps.

The new maps app isn't a complete disaster -- it gets the job done for the most part. It certainly isn't Google Maps, but in a year or two, with some tweaking, I can believe it may rival Google Maps. It's a step backward, but sometimes you must take one step back before going two steps forward (to flip the old adage around). Apple's involvement in this new maps app will benefit a lot of people, plus help to increase the accuracy of OpenStreetMaps overall, for all users -- not just iOS users.