Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 20th Sep 2012 19:24 UTC
Apple "The major new feature of the company's new iOS 6 mobile operating system is a new mapping module developed by Apple itself - a replacement for the Google-supplied maps that have been standard on the iPhone since it debuted in 2007. It is a change borne not of user demand, but of corporate politics: Google's Android platform is the biggest competitive threat to the iPhone, so Apple is cutting ties with Google. iPhone owners might have loved Google Maps, but Apple has no love for Google. Unfortunately, Apple's new maps are simply not as good as Google's." That's putting it mildly - my own town barely even exists on Apple's maps. It's basically a trainwreck, and according to The Verge, Apple has been working on this for the past five years. This is what happens when a company cares more about stupid grudges than its customers. Considering how much effort it has taken Google to get where it is now with maps, don't expect Apple's maps to even get near Google Maps any times soon. This isn't going to take months - this is going to take several years, if at all.
Permalink for comment 536177
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: My, my...
by flypig on Sun 23rd Sep 2012 14:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: My, my..."
flypig
Member since:
2005-07-13

One does indeed have to wonder what kind of technical or political problems prevent digital mapping services from buying a license on the data used by paper road maps and digitalizing it.

While doing a search I noticed a number of research papers and patents about automatically generating data from satellite imagery. I don't know to what extent these technologies are used though.

I thought the following article was particularly interesting. It's about Google's project "Ground Truth" for building maps: http://tinyurl.com/cl85h5l

Interestingly, the article supports your claim that building a comparable mapping database to Google's would be a very hard task: "I came away convinced that the geographic data Google has assembled is not likely to be matched by any other company."

"Surely TomTom don't have these problems on their car SatNavs, do they?

I wouldn't know, having never used one of these...
"
That's too bad. I was hoping you might be able to enlighten me!

As far as I know, Apple did not have a web browser ready when they started to bundle IE with Mac OS

True, but they did have a previous relationship with Microsoft, which I believe was destroyed and then rebuilt for commercial reasons.

and they have not released something that directly competes with Java either.

I was under the impression the JVM on OS X used to be an Apple product?

While Nokia Maps is a very nice piece of software, its database (as probed using maps.nokia.com ) seems not to be so impressive on the countryside.

It's clear Nokia Maps are bad compared to Google for the places you gave (and no doubt many others). The difference is quite startling. However, in some places the balance is the other way:

Compare http://goo.gl/maps/xcl1Z with http://nok.it/FmcWg

Just to be clear though, I'm not suggesting NavTeq is better (or necessarily worse) than Google. But there are a lot of impressive mapping companies, ideas and datasets out there, and the mapping landscape is changing rapidly (so to speak). I'm excited to see all of the new developments that are happening in this area.

Reply Parent Score: 2