Apple Maps Expands Transit Data to San Diego and British Columbia

Apple should have worried about maximum coverage first, THEN gone back over the data to verify and touch it up. The way they're doing it makes no sense. Apple Maps rolled out four years ago ...

Sure, they could have done it like Google, but that's why they're different. Google transit had lots of problems, Apple's ethos, providing "polished" products, is entirely different and it's why they don't rush to always be first at the expense of a quality experience. They have some misses, but being the most profitable company on earth is a great testament that they usually hit the mark.
 
20 worldwide???? Is this a joke?? Should be more like 20 thousand by now... Man, how big is the maps team? One poor guy?
Yep, it's just one guy. And give him a break, his feet are really tired from walking up and down all those streets.
[doublepost=1469488392][/doublepost]As a lifelong resident of San Diego, I, for one, welcome our new Apple Transit Overlords!
 
Probably nobody cares.. but anyone know if apple is expanding the turn by turn functionality to other countries? In my country (Uruguay) it is not available and I'm purchasing a car with Apple CarPlay so it is completely useless since I cannot use google maps on it that works with turn by turn (actually tom tom gps which apple maps is supposed to be based on, has turn by turn! So it is weird)
 
Facts- While over two hundred million people are now in areas covered by Apple Transit, along with a thousand cities, here's why Apple declined to simply throw the switch and turn them all one at once, ala Google.
-http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/07/why-apples-transit-maps-are-rolling-out-so-slowly
I understand why you don't want to merely "flick a switch", but good God, between flicking the switch and this there's still quite a world of bringing coverage a little faster.

It'll probably get a little faster over time, because the employees responsible acquire a routine that let's them expedite future rollouts, but yeah...

Glassed Silver:mac
 
Facts- While over two hundred million people are now in areas covered by Apple Transit, along with a thousand cities, here's why Apple declined to simply throw the switch and turn them all one at once, ala Google.
-http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/07/why-apples-transit-maps-are-rolling-out-so-slowly

Fact - with 200 million in areas covered by Apple Transit, that means 7.2 billion people are not covered...
 
Just tried it for Kelowna, BC and it works great! Its amazing that it works for the whole Province. Wonder why BC is the first one though?
 
Apple should have worried about maximum coverage first, THEN gone back over the data to verify and touch it up. The way they're doing it makes no sense. Apple Maps rolled out four years ago ...
What would be the point of Apple rolling out half assed transit directions that don't offer more than the competition. People would try it and reject it and go back to what they were using. If Apple wants to win people over, they have to do it right the first time. Your bare minimum method gave us iOS 6 Maps, how did that work out for Apple and customers?
[doublepost=1469504088][/doublepost]
Hopefully more Canadian provinces will follow soon after. Like Alberta specifically.
Apple seems to have one team working on Canadian cities, Toronto, Montreal, now Vancouver so Calgary is probably next.
[doublepost=1469504461][/doublepost]
I understand why you don't want to merely "flick a switch", but good God, between flicking the switch and this there's still quite a world of bringing coverage a little faster.

It'll probably get a little faster over time, because the employees responsible acquire a routine that let's them expedite future rollouts, but yeah...

Glassed Silver:mac
Well, at the rate they are going they may have most major American metros by the end of the year. And then it gets even easier because the largest and most complicated transit systems will be done. It'll be a lot less work to add Indy's bus routes than it was to add the entire NE Corridor.
 
What would be the point of Apple rolling out half assed transit directions that don't offer more than the competition. People would try it and reject it and go back to what they were using. If Apple wants to win people over, they have to do it right the first time. Your bare minimum method gave us iOS 6 Maps, how did that work out for Apple and customers?
Indeed. I use Apple Maps all the time, and it's quite nice in its current incarnation (with the added benefit that you can bring things up by asking Siri), but the initial rollout was pretty bad. And now, years later, there are a ton of people who will argue quite strongly that Apple Maps is horrible - and not just that it's horrible, but everyone knows this and you must be an uninformed fool for using it - and it turns out the majority of them haven't touched Apple Maps since the first few weeks after it debuted. But it's such "common knowledge" that Apple Maps is bad, because of that initial impression, and they're so confident that this is true, that they'll never revisit it. Rolling out "half-assed transit directions for everywhere" would be a terrible idea, that could cause more damage to the public's perception of the app.
 
Indeed. I use Apple Maps all the time, and it's quite nice in its current incarnation (with the added benefit that you can bring things up by asking Siri), but the initial rollout was pretty bad. And now, years later, there are a ton of people who will argue quite strongly that Apple Maps is horrible - and not just that it's horrible, but everyone knows this and you must be an uninformed fool for using it - and it turns out the majority of them haven't touched Apple Maps since the first few weeks after it debuted. But it's such "common knowledge" that Apple Maps is bad, because of that initial impression, and they're so confident that this is true, that they'll never revisit it. Rolling out "half-assed transit directions for everywhere" would be a terrible idea, that could cause more damage to the public's perception of the app.

Apple maps isn't horrible, but it is a long way from being as useful for me as Google maps is. I try it every month or so and the directions, estimated arrival times, alternate routes, and especially how it deals with traffic in my daily SoCal gridlock of a commute leave a lot to be desired. I couldn't come close to recommending it over Google maps. I'm sure there are some that wrote it off and never looked back, but honestly they haven't missed anything - IMO, of course.
 
Facts- While over two hundred million people are now in areas covered by Apple Transit, along with a thousand cities, here's why Apple declined to simply throw the switch and turn them all one at once, ala Google.
-http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/07/why-apples-transit-maps-are-rolling-out-so-slowly

They should just turn everything on. Something is better than nothing. Just call cities not curated Beta. Or called curated cities Transit+ or something.
 
Sure, they could have done it like Google, but that's why they're different. Google transit had lots of problems, Apple's ethos, providing "polished" products, is entirely different and it's why they don't rush to always be first at the expense of a quality experience. They have some misses, but being the most profitable company on earth is a great testament that they usually hit the mark.

they are the most profitable cause of the hardware and software.

If they sold services or maps related data they would be bankrupt . Sorry I just found your comment humours given its About map related data , and maps when it launched was a major disaster for a long time.
[doublepost=1469520844][/doublepost]
Indeed. I use Apple Maps all the time, and it's quite nice in its current incarnation (with the added benefit that you can bring things up by asking Siri), but the initial rollout was pretty bad. And now, years later, there are a ton of people who will argue quite strongly that Apple Maps is horrible - and not just that it's horrible, but everyone knows this and you must be an uninformed fool for using it - and it turns out the majority of them haven't touched Apple Maps since the first few weeks after it debuted. But it's such "common knowledge" that Apple Maps is bad, because of that initial impression, and they're so confident that this is true, that they'll never revisit it. Rolling out "half-assed transit directions for everywhere" would be a terrible idea, that could cause more damage to the public's perception of the app.

The irony is that many many on here have the same perception about android and Windows, cause they once used it and .....things could never never change.

I agree with you, Apple maps has come a long way, and I did myself using both Apple and Google , depending on where I am and quality of coverage .
 
The thing is, most major cities in the developed world have digital schedules that are updated constantly. Either Apple is tapping into those, or they're not. If they ARE making use of digital schedules, then most major cities would've been available almost instantly. If they are NOT making use of digital schedules, then their info will be next to useless, since schedules and routes are constantly changing.

Fully agree on this one. Google seems to tap into amazing number of digital schedules which allows them to deliver incredible coverage. To be honest, I strongly believe Apple is doing the same but in incredibly small scale. ApplePay rollout has been slow but at least they have had superior technology. With maps there no such advantage making the whole service somewhat pathetic. But hey, they have whole of China covered although China just doesn't want them there. Well done Apple, another cloud based service fail...
 
That is incorrect. San Diego public transit has 85 million riders annually.

Only because it's the 10th biggest city in the US, not because of how great the public transportation is. In fact, the San Diego transit stations were rated worst in the entire state.
 
Indeed. I use Apple Maps all the time, and it's quite nice in its current incarnation (with the added benefit that you can bring things up by asking Siri), but the initial rollout was pretty bad. And now, years later, there are a ton of people who will argue quite strongly that Apple Maps is horrible - and not just that it's horrible, but everyone knows this and you must be an uninformed fool for using it - and it turns out the majority of them haven't touched Apple Maps since the first few weeks after it debuted. But it's such "common knowledge" that Apple Maps is bad, because of that initial impression, and they're so confident that this is true, that they'll never revisit it. Rolling out "half-assed transit directions for everywhere" would be a terrible idea, that could cause more damage to the public's perception of the app.
Apple Maps is still horrible depending on how you use it. If you search for a landmark or location using anything other than the EXACT wording Apple has (usually the "official title" but not always), you end up with zero results. If you're in one city and search for Street Ave., when it's actually Street St. , it will direct you to a Street Ave. on the other side of the country. If you use transit, it continues to be useless in most of the world's major cities. It is a failed product, one of Apple's worst.
 

"If they sold services or maps related data they would be bankrupt."



Truth is stranger than fiction. The "next big thing" is already here. Rather than being bankrupt from services, it turns out that a large and growing portion of Apple's massive profits are from services. The quarterly news today will likely provide more surprising facts, but from recent quarters' results: (And yes, these service numbers are in the billions)


"Services revenue is higher than Mac and iPad, second only to the iPhone. In contrast to the other declining lines, Services revenue is up 20% from the same quarter a year ago. A bigger surprise, perhaps, it is also higher than Facebook’s latest quarterly revenue: $5.38 billion.

"When Apple released earnings for the first fiscal quarter of 2016 it reported a services value, including unrecognized revenue, of $8.9 billion, up 24 percent year-over-year. That compares to total reported revenue growth of 2 percent."

"Pulling data from Apple's December 2015 earnings report, investment bank Piper Jaffray estimates gross margins on the company's rarely discussed services business could be above 60 percent. And that figure is expected to grow."


"Apple's Services revenue stands at $21 billion currently, but it could ultimately rise to be a $53 billion business over the next five years, according to Credit Suisse.
 
Only because it's the 10th biggest city in the US, not because of how great the public transportation is. In fact, the San Diego transit stations were rated worst in the entire state.

One particular station--Gillespie Field--was rated very poorly, not the entire system of stations. And the reason for the rating was that the city failed to develop around the station.

The San Diego transit addition is a significant positive for Apple Maps and will be used by millions.
 
One particular station--Gillespie Field--was rated very poorly, not the entire system of stations. And the reason for the rating was that the city failed to develop around the station.

The San Diego transit addition is a significant positive for Apple Maps and will be used by millions.

Not true. The Lemon Grove, Santee, Mission Valley, and El Cajon transit centers also received an F rating, along with Gillespie.
 
Hopefully more Canadian provinces will follow soon after. Like Alberta specifically.

Transit in Alberta

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH .................


Sorry that was uncalled for. I grew up in Edmonton suburbs. Part of my brain is likely still frozen from waiting for "every 45 minutes" busses that never actually show up. Yup. 1 hour plus waits, minus 30C. Good times, good times.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top