I see this kind of comparison a lot, so I'll help you understand how it works: Apple bashing gets modded up because of patent lawsuits, high prices, abused workers at third-world manufacturing plants, common or old features being touted as crazy innovations and all of the above combined with gigantic lines for their products, which implies their typical customer's perceived affinity with technology. Google bashing, on the other hand, is often modded down because it happens mostly on comments pertaining to Apple stories. Which means they are probably flamebait and certainly offtopic, thus the rightful moderation. Your example fits nicely. On the other hand, on stories about either Google, privacy concerns or driverless cars, Google bashing is often modded up, so if that's what you fell like doing, lurk for a while and select your stories with more care in the future.
On a related note, X fans will always think that X's competitor Y is being given an unfair advantage, so a wiser approach would be to just let it go.
When does Apple bashing get +5? That was in the old/. like 6 years ago. Now you can't even pinpoint actual flaws in their devices without getting down modded half of the time. Heaven forbid you actually criticize their precious little blood sucking corporation. It is a cult. Worse, it is actually a cult with traction here.
Between that, the stupid 'card view' app store layout, music app problems, wifi login issues and the battery life, iOS Vista really needs some work to get it up to scratch.
We've had an iPad 2 for a bit over a year now, and it keeps dropping it's Wifi connection (since iOS4) and you have to go into the iPad's settings to reconnect to it, it's really fucking annoying.
Every other Wifi device works in the house, phones (though we don't have any Apple phones), laptops, TV, console, etc. and I even get to troll my girlfriend about it (it's her iPad) because my Nexus 7 works fine all the time, but if these are the Wifi issues people have raised I'd wager t
What you don't realise is that Apple is averse to having their stuff copied, and a cartographer's trick is to "make shit up" to put in their map, so that when it's copied, they can tell and sue for infringement: the supposed crappiness of Apple's OS6 maps is actually a form of copy protection.
Well, either that or they decided the best way to make sure nobody copied their maps app was to make sure nobody would ever want to.
Detailing some nice fails on Google's part in mapping.
Apple is somewhat behind, no question - but Google was never perfect. Mapping is hard, you have to put maps out there and let people correct them.
Also another thing that seems really stupid to complain about is flat satellite data warped in 3D mode. You are getting something you could not see before on mobile devices, a cool terrain deformation that actual
Nobody said Google's maps were perfect. What people are saying is that Apple's replacement for Google Maps is very poor as compared to Google Maps. Just because Google Maps has flaws doesn't mean Apple shouldn't be criticized for putting out an inferior product as a replacement.
Steve Jobs would not have let this happen this way.
Steve Jobs would have let Maps go forward exactly this way, because it's the only path Apple has forward in mapping.
We know this because given the time to assemble an entire mapping system Jobs knew about it for a long time during development, certainly knowing choices made like not doing transit and letting App makers provide that functionality.
The maps work well enough right now for most people. Blatant errors will quickly be fixed and life will move on,
Yep, it'll probably take them a couple years, and a whole lot of their cash (they DO have quite a bit of it). Until then, I expect that Google Maps will also be available on the iPhone, and I suspect that at some point within about 2 years, you'll see them reach rough parity in quality with GMaps, and at that point, they can really focus on competing on the merits of their product.
Remember how stagnant browsers were before IE suddenly got slapped in the nuts by Firefox? Competition is good for consumers.
It will take far longer than 6 months to catch up to Google. If that's all long it takes, Apple would have got it right it during the beta.
You can only get so close without massive crowdsourcing of corrections. Apple got as far as they could in beta.
Apple already does one thing better than Google. It can find an Arby's [flickr.com] that has been in the same place for years. If Apple is already ahead in some cases, why do you think they cannot catch up? Google has had years to correct that and failed to do so.
You can only get so close without massive crowdsourcing of corrections.
"Crowdsourcing of corrections" = using your customers as beta testers.
That's why this whole situation is news, and why Apple has received so much pushback. Apple's long-time slogan has been that "it just works". It's supposed to be the other companies who treat consumers as beta testers like this. Apple's customers are now being exposed to Apple's internal politics and development cycle for no good reason that they can see.
That's a strawman. Nobody says that the 3D deformations are what makes Apple Maps suck, and even if they did, you still haven't proven that Apple Maps are better in this area than Google Maps, you've only established that Google Earth has some examples of similar problems but for all we know they're at a much lower frequency.
There is a whole laundry list of problems that people have been talking about since the iOS 6 beta - things like cities being in the totally wrong place, a lack of detail (such as the B
I agree that it is inaccurate to say that Apple Maps is poor, I'd say its a compile pile of sh*t!
Perhaps you can live with the fact that Apple thinks that the Washington monument has been moved, or that the Berlin wall has been resurrected in the middle of Montreal, but when they "forget" the second biggest city in Sweden entirely (Gothenburg), I ask you, is not "very poor" an understatement?
No, what people are saying is that comparing Apple's replacement for Google Maps to Google Maps is like comparing the scrawlings of a drunk toddler with a box of crayons to the Mona Lisa.
I agree, but Apple decided to partner with TOM TOM of all companies. These are the guys that drive people into lakes and down railroad tracks. Google put a ton of work into their maps product and API and sent their cute little Google mapping cars all over the world to get Streetview done. Apple should have just bought Garmin instead or just worked out a map revenue sharing deal with Google. It seems that our egos are what always get us in trouble.
IMHO Apple is on a very self destructive course with
But I do not think street view is fundamentally more useful than a very good 3D mode, if it covers where you want to look.
I'll give you that a 3D map that can let you discern street level details is sufficient for many, but not all, end user scenarios. Don't, however, underestimate the value of the data. Streetview cars are the boots on the ground that ensure that the map data matches reality is some very rough fashion. New roads in particular will be added when they survey an area at the very least. They a
I agree, but Apple decided to partner with TOM TOM of all companies....Apple should have just bought Garmin instead
Garmin do not own any maps. The only realistic alternative to Google and Tom Tom is Nokia, but they're competition too, so its easy to see why Apple went with Tom Tom.
Well if that link is going to be every Apple story so is this one:
You're going to see to that are you?
Google maps were a far better experience in most ways, they shouldn't have replaced it with their own inferior service, they should have made sure it was at least on par. They appear to be copying Google's (and others') tactic of releasing 'beta' products into mainstream, something they never did before, it always used to be about only releasing something when they got it right and polished, that seems to be changing.
Google maps were a far better experience in most ways, they shouldn't have replaced it with their own inferior service
They had to. The license with Google was up; they and iOS developers in general were being strangled by Google API limitations (like no turn by turn directions).
I would also not argue Google maps was far better experience in "most ways". Imagine Search is totally fixed, it finds everything else as well as Google.
Now you have a more readable map, especially when driving (Apple does a great
I'm well aware of the new features of Apple Maps, you don't have to detail them, that's clearly not something i'm objecting to. What they should have done is what they did when they introduced Siri, allow the user to switch back to the other service if they want to.
I'm well aware of the new features of Apple Maps, you don't have to detail them, that's clearly not something i'm objecting to. What they should have done is what they did when they introduced Siri, allow the user to switch back to the other service if they want to.
You can, but going to maps.google.com in Safari. Or using he Bing app which includes maps. Or by using one of many other mapping applications.
In fact the one thing Apple could NOT do is provide the old mapping app because the license is ending,
That doesn't work the same at all, it doesn't integrate with Siri either or with other applications.
In fact the one thing Apple could NOT do is provide the old mapping app because the license is ending, and it's not clear Google WOULD allow them to continue as they are developing their own mapping applications.
It's also not clear they wouldn't either, in fact it's not even logical for google to exclude its maps from the platform, they certainly haven't done that with their other services. I'm sure given the amount of negative responses and criticism leveled at Apple's maps that if this were indeed the case they would make it clear they had no choice, but of course there's no logical explanation for such a thing any
I agree, in principle. But the hard part with things like Siri and Maps are that you actually need the products in use "in the wild" to be able to analyze the data, correct problems, and refine the product. Google didn't release Maps as a "fully complete" service either - they released it as a beta, and refined it over... what - 7, 8 years now?
It would've been nice to see them work with Google to migrate the Google Maps app to a standalone app before making this so users would have an alternative, but the
Actually Apple used to be more about reducing the number of features down enough so that it could be implemented by a small team and judiciously press the developers until it comes out to Steve Jobs satisfaction. They could have made the feature initially only available in North America. Instead they let users access worldwide data which is plainly horrible.
Detailing some nice fails on Google's part in mapping.
Well yes, but the fact that they managed to come up with 10 failures for Google maps over the many years its been available, while that tumblr blog has hundreds of comparable failures (misplaced cities, useless directions, completely incorrect coastlines, invalid borders, all as bad as what was listed in the page you linked) in a few days says something. Mapping is hard, there are enourmous amounts of data, and mistakes will be made. Apple seems to have made an order of magnitude more and are being ridicule
Or how about when I went to Berlin this April and Google claimed there was an Apple Store in a place where there was not? Fun times (that one at least is fixed).
Again, Apple has some fixing to do but to claim Google was the best mapping experience ever is to ignore real failings it a
Actually, a good chunk of those funny blunders falls into the third of these categories of problems with Apple's iOS 6 Maps:
1. Functionality that was there in the old (Google Maps-based) version, and that was lost in the new one.
2. Errors due to outdated or incomplete information, which conduces to bad navigation directions, misplaced locations, and other funny results. (That is, funny if you are not depending on the feature).
3. Errors in rendering of certain features (Hoover Dam, Eiffel Tower) which can be quite hilarious.
The first category includes things like directions for public transportation, pedestrians, and bike trails, as well a more robust search system, but it doesn't produce funny errors, they don't get pointed out very often.
The second category makes a good chunk of the hilarity, but it's something that Apple will (slowly) correct as they refine their databases. Google has many years of headstart here, so it's no wonder their database is in much better shape.
The third category is the one that produces the most hilarious errors but... well, it turns out that it reflects artifacts in the renderings produced by the flyover feature, a feature that AFAIK is not really part of Google Maps, and thus the criticism is rather silly!
Yes, Google has similar flyovers in Google Earth, but that's a separate product. Furthermore, Google Earth is plagued by similar errors in rendering. Examples: In Google Earth, go to this location in Houston: 29.713347 -95.382174, and follow the bayou (river) as it goes West and South-west towards the Texas Medical Center. See how all those bridges appear to sink to the level of the water? A similar example can be found in Philadelphia: 39.958905 -75.180871.
tl;dr My point is: The 3D rendering errors are funny but not exclusive to Apple. The inaccurate database is easy to fix, but will take time. The missing features are the real problem and we don't know if Apple even intends to add them.
This. (Score:4, Funny)
It's not like they don't need help [tumblr.com]...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Can we just post this link in the blurb on every Apple story so that we don't need to waste mod points on all the karmawhores?
Re:This. (Score:5, Insightful)
I see this kind of comparison a lot, so I'll help you understand how it works: Apple bashing gets modded up because of patent lawsuits, high prices, abused workers at third-world manufacturing plants, common or old features being touted as crazy innovations and all of the above combined with gigantic lines for their products, which implies their typical customer's perceived affinity with technology. Google bashing, on the other hand, is often modded down because it happens mostly on comments pertaining to Apple stories. Which means they are probably flamebait and certainly offtopic, thus the rightful moderation. Your example fits nicely. On the other hand, on stories about either Google, privacy concerns or driverless cars, Google bashing is often modded up, so if that's what you fell like doing, lurk for a while and select your stories with more care in the future.
On a related note, X fans will always think that X's competitor Y is being given an unfair advantage, so a wiser approach would be to just let it go.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:This. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
What are the Wifi problems?
We've had an iPad 2 for a bit over a year now, and it keeps dropping it's Wifi connection (since iOS4) and you have to go into the iPad's settings to reconnect to it, it's really fucking annoying.
Every other Wifi device works in the house, phones (though we don't have any Apple phones), laptops, TV, console, etc. and I even get to troll my girlfriend about it (it's her iPad) because my Nexus 7 works fine all the time, but if these are the Wifi issues people have raised I'd wager t
Re: (Score:2)
What you don't realise is that Apple is averse to having their stuff copied, and a cartographer's trick is to "make shit up" to put in their map, so that when it's copied, they can tell and sue for infringement: the supposed crappiness of Apple's OS6 maps is actually a form of copy protection.
Well, either that or they decided the best way to make sure nobody copied their maps app was to make sure nobody would ever want to.
And that... (Score:1)
Well if that link is going to be every Apple story so is this one:
What mapping company is perfect? [searchenginepeople.com]
Detailing some nice fails on Google's part in mapping.
Apple is somewhat behind, no question - but Google was never perfect. Mapping is hard, you have to put maps out there and let people correct them.
Also another thing that seems really stupid to complain about is flat satellite data warped in 3D mode. You are getting something you could not see before on mobile devices, a cool terrain deformation that actual
Re: (Score:1)
Nobody said Google's maps were perfect. What people are saying is that Apple's replacement for Google Maps is very poor as compared to Google Maps. Just because Google Maps has flaws doesn't mean Apple shouldn't be criticized for putting out an inferior product as a replacement.
Re:That's the thing - it is not "very poor" (Score:4, Funny)
Google also sometimes cannot find things that I am pretty sure should be easy to find.
You're right. I've been looking for this place called Schadenfreude and I can't seem to find it anywhere. Is it on your Apple map?
Found it (Score:2)
You're right. I've been looking for this place called Schadenfreude and I can't seem to find it anywhere. Is it on your Apple map?
Got a heap of Schadenfreude [flickr.com] right here.
Delightful. For you see, in the end if Apple can find food and Google cannot, which userbase will survive the coming winter?
Re: (Score:1)
Steve Jobs would not have let this happen this way.
Steve Jobs would have let Maps go forward exactly this way, because it's the only path Apple has forward in mapping.
We know this because given the time to assemble an entire mapping system Jobs knew about it for a long time during development, certainly knowing choices made like not doing transit and letting App makers provide that functionality.
The maps work well enough right now for most people. Blatant errors will quickly be fixed and life will move on,
Re: (Score:1)
It will take far longer than 6 months to catch up to Google. If that's all long it takes, Apple would have got it right it during the beta.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, it'll probably take them a couple years, and a whole lot of their cash (they DO have quite a bit of it). Until then, I expect that Google Maps will also be available on the iPhone, and I suspect that at some point within about 2 years, you'll see them reach rough parity in quality with GMaps, and at that point, they can really focus on competing on the merits of their product.
Remember how stagnant browsers were before IE suddenly got slapped in the nuts by Firefox? Competition is good for consumers.
Re: (Score:1)
It will take far longer than 6 months to catch up to Google. If that's all long it takes, Apple would have got it right it during the beta.
You can only get so close without massive crowdsourcing of corrections. Apple got as far as they could in beta.
Apple already does one thing better than Google. It can find an Arby's [flickr.com] that has been in the same place for years. If Apple is already ahead in some cases, why do you think they cannot catch up? Google has had years to correct that and failed to do so.
If you
Re: (Score:2)
You can only get so close without massive crowdsourcing of corrections.
"Crowdsourcing of corrections" = using your customers as beta testers.
That's why this whole situation is news, and why Apple has received so much pushback. Apple's long-time slogan has been that "it just works". It's supposed to be the other companies who treat consumers as beta testers like this. Apple's customers are now being exposed to Apple's internal politics and development cycle for no good reason that they can see.
Re: (Score:1)
That's a strawman. Nobody says that the 3D deformations are what makes Apple Maps suck, and even if they did, you still haven't proven that Apple Maps are better in this area than Google Maps, you've only established that Google Earth has some examples of similar problems but for all we know they're at a much lower frequency.
There is a whole laundry list of problems that people have been talking about since the iOS 6 beta - things like cities being in the totally wrong place, a lack of detail (such as the B
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that it is inaccurate to say that Apple Maps is poor, I'd say its a compile pile of sh*t!
Perhaps you can live with the fact that Apple thinks that the Washington monument has been moved, or that the Berlin wall has been resurrected in the middle of Montreal, but when they "forget" the second biggest city in Sweden entirely (Gothenburg), I ask you, is not "very poor" an understatement?
Take a look here:http://theamazingios6maps.tumblr.com/ [tumblr.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No, what people are saying is that comparing Apple's replacement for Google Maps to Google Maps is like comparing the scrawlings of a drunk toddler with a box of crayons to the Mona Lisa.
Re: (Score:3)
IMHO Apple is on a very self destructive course with
Re: (Score:2)
Thats because they know the users will buy it anyway.
The guy that drove innovation at apple died. Now Apple is back on a slow descent to Sculley land.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll give you that a 3D map that can let you discern street level details is sufficient for many, but not all, end user scenarios. Don't, however, underestimate the value of the data. Streetview cars are the boots on the ground that ensure that the map data matches reality is some very rough fashion. New roads in particular will be added when they survey an area at the very least. They a
Re:And that... (Score:4, Informative)
Garmin do not own any maps. The only realistic alternative to Google and Tom Tom is Nokia, but they're competition too, so its easy to see why Apple went with Tom Tom.
Re: (Score:2)
Well if that link is going to be every Apple story so is this one:
You're going to see to that are you?
Google maps were a far better experience in most ways, they shouldn't have replaced it with their own inferior service, they should have made sure it was at least on par. They appear to be copying Google's (and others') tactic of releasing 'beta' products into mainstream, something they never did before, it always used to be about only releasing something when they got it right and polished, that seems to be changing.
Re: (Score:1)
Google maps were a far better experience in most ways, they shouldn't have replaced it with their own inferior service
They had to. The license with Google was up; they and iOS developers in general were being strangled by Google API limitations (like no turn by turn directions).
I would also not argue Google maps was far better experience in "most ways". Imagine Search is totally fixed, it finds everything else as well as Google.
Now you have a more readable map, especially when driving (Apple does a great
Re: (Score:2)
You can (Score:2)
I'm well aware of the new features of Apple Maps, you don't have to detail them, that's clearly not something i'm objecting to. What they should have done is what they did when they introduced Siri, allow the user to switch back to the other service if they want to.
You can, but going to maps.google.com in Safari. Or using he Bing app which includes maps. Or by using one of many other mapping applications.
In fact the one thing Apple could NOT do is provide the old mapping app because the license is ending,
Re: (Score:2)
You can, but going to maps.google.com in Safari.
That doesn't work the same at all, it doesn't integrate with Siri either or with other applications.
In fact the one thing Apple could NOT do is provide the old mapping app because the license is ending, and it's not clear Google WOULD allow them to continue as they are developing their own mapping applications.
It's also not clear they wouldn't either, in fact it's not even logical for google to exclude its maps from the platform, they certainly haven't done that with their other services. I'm sure given the amount of negative responses and criticism leveled at Apple's maps that if this were indeed the case they would make it clear they had no choice, but of course there's no logical explanation for such a thing any
Re: (Score:1)
That doesn't work the same at all, it doesn't integrate with Siri either or with other applications.
Most people when using maps open maps first, so it really doesn't matter if it's not something pulled up by the system.
The exception is contacts, but mapping apps generally pull up contacts to map, and contacts lets you easily copy an address to paste into Google Maps.
in fact it's not even logical for google to exclude its maps from the platform,
They aren't. They are excluding Apple from writing said apps.
Th
Re: (Score:2)
Most people when using maps open maps first, so it really doesn't matter if it's not something pulled up by the system.
Who opens maps and then uses Siri? Or opens maps, then copies the content of a maps link and pastes it into the maps app?
The exception is contacts, but mapping apps generally pull up contacts to map, and contacts lets you easily copy an address to paste into Google Maps.
Of course you can do that, but Apple always prized its ability to make things intuitive rather than having a roundabout way of doing things.
They aren't. They are excluding Apple from writing said apps.
Well the app already exists, it's not logical for google to say 'we don't want that app on iOS anymore' given their other offerings.
Re: (Score:1)
Why didn't Apple negotiate a new deal with Google then?
Did Google refuse to negotiate with Apple or did Apple refuse to negotiate with Google?
Both (Score:1)
Google wanted way too much money and control (like a larger logo on the maps).
Apple didn't want to have to pay the mapping blackmail forever, just waiting for the day when Google decided to stop letting them use Google data.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, in principle. But the hard part with things like Siri and Maps are that you actually need the products in use "in the wild" to be able to analyze the data, correct problems, and refine the product. Google didn't release Maps as a "fully complete" service either - they released it as a beta, and refined it over... what - 7, 8 years now?
It would've been nice to see them work with Google to migrate the Google Maps app to a standalone app before making this so users would have an alternative, but the
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Detailing some nice fails on Google's part in mapping.
Well yes, but the fact that they managed to come up with 10 failures for Google maps over the many years its been available, while that tumblr blog has hundreds of comparable failures (misplaced cities, useless directions, completely incorrect coastlines, invalid borders, all as bad as what was listed in the page you linked) in a few days says something. Mapping is hard, there are enourmous amounts of data, and mistakes will be made. Apple seems to have made an order of magnitude more and are being ridicule
Re: (Score:1)
Well yes, but the fact that they managed to come up with 10 failures for Google maps over the many years its been available
No, it's because people stopped caring about failures with google maps.
Here's a current one [flickr.com] for example.
Or how about when I went to Berlin this April and Google claimed there was an Apple Store in a place where there was not? Fun times (that one at least is fixed).
Again, Apple has some fixing to do but to claim Google was the best mapping experience ever is to ignore real failings it a
P.S. Nokia is worse (Score:1)
Except Nokia already has this, and their 3D version reportedly doesn't have anywhere near this range of issues.
All I have to say is think again...
Nokia's take on Hoover Dam [nokia.com]
Worse 3D rendering than Apple or Google, and the imagery data is far older (before the bridge was completed!).
It also appears to have fewer cities rendered in 3D, Denver for example seems to have no 3D data.
Now that the Apple Haters have opened this can of worms, prepare to find that solutions you thought were pretty good are in fact eve
Re:This. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not like they don't need help [tumblr.com]...
Actually, a good chunk of those funny blunders falls into the third of these categories of problems with Apple's iOS 6 Maps:
The first category includes things like directions for public transportation, pedestrians, and bike trails, as well a more robust search system, but it doesn't produce funny errors, they don't get pointed out very often.
The second category makes a good chunk of the hilarity, but it's something that Apple will (slowly) correct as they refine their databases. Google has many years of headstart here, so it's no wonder their database is in much better shape.
The third category is the one that produces the most hilarious errors but... well, it turns out that it reflects artifacts in the renderings produced by the flyover feature, a feature that AFAIK is not really part of Google Maps, and thus the criticism is rather silly!
Yes, Google has similar flyovers in Google Earth, but that's a separate product. Furthermore, Google Earth is plagued by similar errors in rendering. Examples:
In Google Earth, go to this location in Houston: 29.713347 -95.382174, and follow the bayou (river) as it goes West and South-west towards the Texas Medical Center. See how all those bridges appear to sink to the level of the water? A similar example can be found in Philadelphia: 39.958905 -75.180871.
tl;dr My point is: The 3D rendering errors are funny but not exclusive to Apple. The inaccurate database is easy to fix, but will take time. The missing features are the real problem and we don't know if Apple even intends to add them.