I'm curious where iOS will head.
Not sure where iOS will be heading, but this is where OSX will be heading :
I'm curious where iOS will head.
(...)
ie: Ive is overseeing what you look at on the screens and how it relates to the object you're holding.
Not sure where iOS will be heading, but this is where OSX will be heading :
this is for iOS 8 ... In 2014 ...
Wow, and I just made a long post last week about how Scott is behind everything I don't currently like at Apple.
Glad to see Tim is reading my posts and taking my advice!
Not sure where iOS will be heading, but this is where OSX will be heading :
That guy was an *******
I assume you know this guy? Or you just read rumors from an author that praises Windows 8 design?
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670760/will-apples-tacky-software-design-philosophy-cause-a-revolt
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670705/microsoft-new-design-strategy#1
You are taking my original point and arguing with me. My point was Apple should have continued to use the Google Data they were getting and integrate with TeleAtlas/NAVTEQ. Rather than dumping Google with the premise Google was not giving Voice Navigation feature.
Just because there is a published algorithm doesn't mean every one can develop the software. Only two successful companies in this area are NAVTEQ and TeleAtlas.
If any one could develop navigation software NOKIA wouldn't have paid 8 Billion for NAVTEQ, when they had their own product Ovi Maps.
No. I'm saying what you are literally saying makes no sense because you don't actually understand what each vendor is providing and where the value is.
1) If Apple had Google's map data, there's no point in integrating with TeleAtlas/Navteq because Google's map data included TeleAtlas/Navteq data already.
2) Google stipulates that their map data may not be used for turn-by-turn navigation (probably what you refer to as voice navigation). Trying to get around that by "integrating" their data is not a solution as it'd be a breach of contract.
3) Google also only provided map tiles to Apple, not vector data. Trying to do a turn-by-turn navigation system using just tiles over cellular would be a really bad experience because we don't have unlimited data plans.
4) Developing the software is not the hard part. Getting the data is.
Nokia paid for the data. Not the software.
I'm not sure how many different ways I need to say it for you to understand. A* can be implemented by students in undergrad projects. It isn't that hard. I even have an old implementation somewhere in my code archives tied to US Census bureau TIGER map data. I ran it and it literally routed a path from my house to my work. The problem? TIGER maps doesn't include one-way streets, so it'll route me the shortest path it knows of even against oncoming traffic.
Yes, I actually made a lame attempt at my own in-car nav software back in 2005 for kicks. I consulted for friends who also tried and failed at a startup trying to do maps.
What you've suggested was never an option.
Siri is bad because it's not real AI, it's just basic pattern recognition. And there aren't THAT many patterns programmed in. There isn't even a real context system, other than a pre-programmed run-through of certain scripts. Siri is the definition of a gimmick.
Not that I know the guy personally, but John Browett was in charge of a retail chain in UK called Dixons Stores Group (DSG). Whilst at uni I worked at PC World (a DSG store chain), man that company sucked so bad. People didn't know what they were selling (one guy I worked with knew nothing about computers and had experience selling washing machines....) All the management cared about was selling the after-sales products. When I heard that John Browett was hired I wondered who the hell thought that was a good idea? Not surprised he's out at all. Apple is about service, care and a long term customer relationship- DSG was about up-selling, volume and couldn't care about seeing repeat business.
That is a terrible, terrible joke. That wasn't even funny. It was insulting.
A pox on you.
Sorry, but no. Not in academia, and never had plans for that route. I do have a CompSci undergrad degree though.I take you are an academician. I have to politely say you are missing few neurons.
What you do in a university lab or give as an assignment to students doesn't apply in real world.
Your stipulation is Google want to cutoff Apple completely. That is never the case in high visibility partnerships. Any company will be happy to do whatever possible to have presence on iPhone. Only exception is Apple inflicting enormous pain where a partner sees no value. Same story with Google or Samsung.
There are several sources where you can get data. It won't even cost 1 cent per data point. Thats what Forstall tried to do. Maps data you can get from Digital Globe. Digital Globe buys mostly from Indian Remote Sensing Agency because they are cheap. There are lot of schools process raw satellite data and produce useable maps. There are cities in US sell digital aerial images. There is Dun & Bradstreet for commercial data.
I am an Artificial Intelligence major with 20 years IT experience. You can never build everything on your own. Thats where your negotiation skills come into picture. What Apple is doing wrong fighting with every trading partner.
Data availability is least of the problems. Data Integration is the problem. Let me repeat again there are only two companies with successful commercial navigation software.
Federighi will lead iOS and OSX development...... The merge of the two has just begun.
With ARM processors gaining in popularity and performance, with Windows 8 getting support for ARM, with Android Ubuntu and how it turns a cellphone into a desktop computer when docked, with convertibles tablets that can be turned into laptops with a snap-on keyboard and touchpad, with Apple pushing for external devices like hard drives, optical drives and monitors through Thunderbolt, I think the future is pretty clear.
I could see the MacBook Air becoming so thin that it can be turned into a 13" tablet with a snapping keyboard and touchpad. Add a Thunderbolt port to it and you get a full computer with a monitor, a full hard drive, a printer, an optical drive, a keyboard and a mouse.
They could even make iMac-style docking stations, but it wouldn't be like Apple to make a product like that.