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.
Thread beginning with comment 536197
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!
by phoudoin on Sun 23rd Sep 2012 20:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!"
Member since:

Apple just broke a monopoly - why aren't you applauding?

Because, so far, what can only be observed is that they broke iOS native mappings user experience?

Plus, AFAIK, the new iOS Plans app is still not open. The API to access is even more closed than the previous one, and while it allow third parties plugins to join their geolocation data as an overlay, the way the maps, is composed, the way the search is done, the way directions are computed, all these are still as closed as they are with Google Maps.
Worse, I'll bet that contrary to Google Maps, only iOS apps will be allow to use it, while everybody can use the Google one, from web site to desktop to embebded widget, whatever the plateform.

Calling the iOS Plans switch a move toward openess is quite ironic. It's many thing, mostly a political move more than anything, but it's far to be an open movement victory.

Apple maps are based on open source maps and are more open to third party developers than Google's, why aren't you applauding this triumph of 'open' over 'closed'?

OpenStreetMaps is only one of the maps source that are reported to be used by Apple's new Plans app, and cleary theu don't use the default rendered tiles but does the rendering themselves. And it's not a *triumph*, otherwise we won't have this thread in the first place.
Did you notice how fast TomTom reacted publicly, stating that they're selling their maps database, but not the one to blame on what is done (or not) from them.

And, IIRC, no satelites images are yet under open licenses. But, wait, you're right, the old monochrome WW2-like satelites photos are under public domain. That's a triumph of "open". Except for the... Not.

A cynical observer could be fooled into thinking that when terms like 'open versus closed' or 'monopoly' get thrown around in criticism of Apple that actually they are just rhetorical phrases used to tart up cheap Apple hatred and in no way reflect any actually held principles or beliefs.

1) Apple's new Plans app is still closed as it was before, except for third parties that Apple is happy to take extra data to enrich their currently quite-emptier -than-they-used-to-be maps.

2) Where did you read that Apple made this move *because* Google was closed? Or because they can't stand closed-core-technology anymore (after 5 years of reflexion...) !?

3) Even a cynical observer knows why they did this move, and the customer was never part of the motivations.

4) Last but not least, only a cynical observer can't see the gap between the June presentation of Maps and the actual Maps experience today, and can't think if the move was for a better user expérience Apple"s Q&A will *never* *ever* give the green light. Which is incidentely the proof that the move's motivation is somewhere else, neither the "let's go open-washing" you're trying to push, neither a better user experience
that customers will have to wait longer to get and meanwhile to tolerate a lesser experience than under iOS 5.

And that, every iOS customer can see it, not only the cynical ones.

Reply Parent Score: 3