Personally I love flyover as it allows me to armchair travel the world. It fun and fascinating. Perhaps you should lighten up a bit instead of being the typical grumpy old man of the likes that loves to bitch and moan and rant on MacRumors.
Oh, and one more thing: You have options and Google is one of them. Use it. See how that works? Isn't life grand?
Sadly, Apple has limited Siri integration to Apple maps and won't open up Siri APIs to third party developers.
Being able to say "take me home" from anywhere in the system (even when outside the app itself) and having it open up maps to take you home (or anywhere else) is one the best part about Apple maps.
Even though I actually prefer Google maps, in its current state (because it has more accurate data), I'm generally forced to use Apple maps of I want to use Siri.
So much for choice...
As an aside, I want to love and use Apple maps, I really do - but I'm tired of going to the wrong locations and I can't rely on it, so I feel 'forced' to use Google
The people who are trying to fix those things are not the same people who are handling flyover. You treating Apple like they couldn't delegate works and should focus on one that still needs tons of data to fix. Google is about 10 years ahead when Apple started its own maps. It will take time but they'll get there for sure.
It's been several years since Apple maps has been released and their mapping data is just as terrible as when they first started (even though flyover has dramatically improved... and moving landmarks!)
It took me to two wrong places just last week. In the same day. It's near useless as a mapping app as it's currently unreliable.
I'd be fine trusting Apple to 'delegate' if I actually saw results. But I haven't.
Sometimes business is about 'focus'. Instead of trying to do 20 things half-heartedly, you can focus your time, money, and resources on just working on 2 or 3 things and doing them incredibly well.
My point was that Apple should do the latter for maps since they haven't seen any major gains in its mapping data since inception. If they put the weight of their entire mapping division behind 'the right things', I guarantee you we'd see better (and faster) results with regard to the mapping data.
And another thing... the whole 'Google had a head start' only worked for so long. After this many years, that is a cop-out answer and, at this point, it's just an excuse for Apple to hide behind to completely avoid accountability and responsibility for the quality of their product.
Speaking purely for the way you may use it (or not use it), of course.
Whether you're talking about Flyover or Street View, some use it to "know before you go." Others, indeed, use it to fantasize, whether that's for a visit one never makes, or to re-visit old haunts. Yeah, it can be "armchair travel," but so what? Armchair travelers are curious about the world about them, which, to me, is a very good thing.
Maps serve more than a single, utilitarian purpose - they serve a wide range of utilitarian purposes, and some that are purely entertainment (what's that saying... "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy?"). A fly-over imparts info that cannot be conveyed in an abstract, two-dimensional street grid, and can impart more useful data than a two-dimensional satellite image. Is that information of primary or secondary importance? That, too, will depend on the user's needs.
For me, the more maps, the merrier. I rarely refer to a single map when I travel - each has strengths and weaknesses; as far as I'm concerned, the competition between Apple and Google has been anything but a waste of resources on either company's part.
I wouldn't mind Flyover as a feature if I could reliably count on Apple maps to get where I'm going. But I can't. It took me to two incorrect locations (and didn't even have the third in its database) just last week alone.
Flyover is a 'bells and whistles' feature for 'armchair' travelers as you pointed out. Nobody - nobody uses it for navigation. Period. It'd be disingenuous to say that you do.
A navigation app is supposed to tell you where to go. Plain and simple. So people get irked when they roll out fancy features for the app when they still haven't gotten the basics right (good mapping data).
The phrase 'it's like putting lipstick on a pig' comes to mind.
Oh boy, here come the "Apple should focus on x,y,z instead of flyover gimmick." At least they're still improving and expanding it 3 years later instead of abandoning it.
Yep. They sure are. Moving landmarks. More flyover locations. Whoo hoo! Now I can get directions to the wrong location... in style!
Meanwhile their mapping data hasn't meaningfully improved in the last several years. And for a navigation app that's supposed to tell you where to go, that's literally the most critical part.
..... or perhaps the 'Apple Satellite' next?......
