Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Maps Vehicles Begin Surveying Connecticut, Imagery Could Aid Apple's Autonomous Driving Efforts
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not at all. Henry Ford said that if he asked his customers what they wanted they would have told him "a faster horse". In other words they only want tiny increments over what they already have. What you want is a cheaper Tesla. But what the Henry Fords of the modern world are all working for is a complete driverless car. Maybe the front seats can pivot to face to the rear and you can blackout the front window. Then your 10 your old kid can be dropped off to school while you get ready for work and picked up at school in the afternoon and dropped an Grandma's house.
People are afraid the self driving car will make some error. Well human driven cars make LOTS of error. If driverless cars kill "only" 300 people EVERY DAY we will be 10 times better off because currently human drivers kill more than 3,000 people per day world wide. Humans have set the bar very low. Self driving cars don't have to be that good to be 10X better than human drivers.
Today cars are the leading cause of death for young people. If self driving cars were the 2nd most common cause of death it would be a huge improvement. So they need not be perfect doing 10X better than humans is good enough.
At some point in the future when many people have self driving cars everyone will see the "problem" is the human driven cars and they will be banned from most roads.
[doublepost=1494182465][/doublepost]
You are likely correct. At present robots might not be better than human drivers. The only question is how long before robots are MUCH better than humans? Certainly the answer is "more then five years and less than 50 years." So people who are alive today will live to see a blind person sitting in the back of his car being driven by a robot.
Quite soon after that you will see human driven cars being banned from more and more streets and finally only allowed in special parks with tracks for people operate antique vehicles (that have bee retrofitted with automatic overrides)
They were, but then Google pushed their hand and wanted an excessive amount of user data about iOS users. You don't remember the Schmidt as a board member fall out, him betraying Jobs, and Apple rushing to get their own mapping SW up. Ultimately it's Apple's fault for putting so much trust in Google, especially when you know they bought Android, but Apple did the right thing by protecting user privacy, and you have the option to use Google Maps on iOS or a different mobile OS altogether.
[doublepost=1494187458][/doublepost]
The update is being created as we speak. The new mac mini will be a real mini cooper powered by apple. It is going to be their flagship product. the reason it has taken so long to be released is because they're trying to work out how to prevent users (note they'll not be owners) from installing non approved petrol (gasoline for the US) or using after market tires and wheels. Once it is fully locked down to apple's ecosystem, you'll be free to sit back and relax while Siri drives you to where apple believes you need to go.
I know this as well as you.
[doublepost=1494193557][/doublepost]
If Apple bought Waze in 2013, we wouldn't be having this discussion now. The only thing that Waze lacks compared to Google Maps is lane guidance.
The fact that Apple Maps is so behind Google Maps is not Google's fault. Apple owns this one, and one chance they had to get the platform that could compete with Google Maps (Waze) they blew. They could have easily offered $2 billion and they would have gotten it.
Last edited:
You should do more research. Apple Maps flopped when it was introduced years back as a definite "not ready for prime time" app. Now it's much different. I use it regularly around the country and frequently do a side by side with Google Maps to do a current comparison. Apple Maps works great. Google Maps is still stronger on some search aspects, but if my experience wasn't typical Apple Maps wouldn't be used many billions of times a week and exponentially more than Google Maps. Google Maps takes about 90 seconds to download, so it isn't a question that it isn't available because if Apple Maps didn't work well folks like me would switch back. There is another reason to use Apple Maps and that's security and privacy. When you use Google Maps, they keep all that data forever and link it to your master file, so it just keeps building the dossier (read your terms of services folks) that has every gmail sent and received, every search, every posting, every photograph, every document uploaded, etc., etc. Some folks don't care if that master file is available to hackers, governments, intel agencies and criminals, but I am glad that Apple offers an alternative.
Why have Apple not even bothered in FIVE YEARS to do their version of streetview??
That shows just how interested Apple really are in their so-called 'services', when they can just keep chucking out expensive hardware as their main revenue generator.
All this vastly undermines their core brand, yet they don't do anything properly to fix the issue – even going so far as to charge the same or higher rates than better competitors (for online storage, for example).
Laughable. Yet many of us suck it up, thinking 'next time it'll be better, surely next time Apple...?'.
That shows just how interested Apple really are in their so-called 'services', when they can just keep chucking out expensive hardware as their main revenue generator.
All this vastly undermines their core brand, yet they don't do anything properly to fix the issue – even going so far as to charge the same or higher rates than better competitors (for online storage, for example).
Laughable. Yet many of us suck it up, thinking 'next time it'll be better, surely next time Apple...?'.
Last edited:
I'll certainly be looking forward to a street view version of AppleMap. Even Bing Maps have a streetside view. However, Apple is so far behind Google Maps and will never likely catch up unless Apple starts getting really serious about outdoing Google. Apple doesn't seem that type of company, though, to try to win just for the sake of beating another company without some major financial gains. One thing I'd really like AppleMap to have and that's bicycle trails like Google Maps does. It's great knowing where all the best routes are for bicycles in the major boroughs of NYC.
While Apple Maps is better than any OEM, it does not route nearly as well as GMaps or Waze.
All systems will get you there, it's just a matter of how well. Apple Maps will take me on an incredibly stupid route from my house to get to the highway and will add a few minutes of trip time.
Apple Maps has improved over the years and won't cause many problems in day to day usage. If time is of the essence, it's better to stick with one of Google's apps for the time being.
I am thinkin some variation of this:
Instead of buying, maintaining and keeping a place for a car to wait on me 90% of the time - I order 'my' car and it shows up where & when I am ready to use it.
Once I get where I want to go, it takes off for next user or goes to a docking station somewhere to top off batteries
Last edited:
When Apple Maps tells you to drive over a bridge that is missing a span in the middle of the night as their way to detour around standstill traffic on the interstate, I have to draw a red line.
I purchased a new car specifically to have Car Play on it, but in the process I completely forgot that Apple Maps is so ineffective and sometimes even dangerous in navigating. Remember that story when Apple Maps took people in Australia down the road leading to the bush without gas stations on the way, and someone almost died in the Australian desert when they ran out of gas? Guess what? My recent experience with Apple Maps was just as dangerous.
I've been keeping Apple Maps as a backup for years, but once I tried Waze, my two navigation apps of choice became Waze and Google Maps. In the three months of owning a new car, we used Car Play just a handful of times due to the ineptness of Apple Maps. The rest of the time, we kept Waze running on the phone for navigating. Now that I have Android Auto via a Moto G4 Play permanently connected to the car, Apple Maps is permanently banished from this household, and by extension, Car Play is too. I will throw away this Android phone and will go back to Car Play if Apple ever brings Google Maps or Waze to Car Play.
As for stability, Android Auto is 100% stable and the experience of using it is delightful as it should have been with Car Play. $150 for Moto G4 Play is a small price to pay to finally have a reliable navigation system on the car screen along with all other features that both Android Auto and Car Play provide equally well.
For someone who is interested in this solution, there are apps on Google Play Store that sync calendar and contacts with iCloud. Android Auto is now able to access all of our iCloud contacts and calendars, and it can navigate to addresses in both contacts and calendar events. I haven't loaded any music to this Android phone yet, but once I do, my entire music library will be accessible in the car as well. Android Auto can also text via third-party texting apps (along with the native Android apps). For example, it can text with WhatsApp and Skype. It can stream from Pandora and other streaming services, excluding Apple Music. Android Auto has a few dozen apps that it can currently use. Since I don't have an Apple Music subscription, Android Auto currently completely satisfies my needs for a car infotainment system.
Last edited:
That's the day we start to worry, it won't bode well when man creates machines that are more clever then he is... and women are too!
[doublepost=1494202724][/doublepost]
ABS brakes are hardly a comparison to an AI run car, and what do you think an AI car will do if it's a choice between killing a child on the pavement or the passenger... and if autonomous vehicles are so advance as you proclaim, why have laws already been drawn up and passed to state a licensed driver MUST be in the driving seat at all times huh? You really are putting way too much faith into a robot being better then a human..
I've found that both Google Maps and Apple Maps and any GPS I've used can give you less than optimal routing, especially in areas where you know some of the impossible to program subtleties, such as difficult left turns. Not only can they not know everything, they have to make assumptions about the types of roads that will be prioritized. You may know that the twisting back road over the mountain is shorter and faster, because you've driven it many times, but should any routing app suggest such a route to someone who may not know the area? This is a fuzzy logic, not a data, decision. I haven't found one to be clearly better than the other at making these distinctions, only different.
I can't see fully automated cars being viable any time soon - there are so many human factors that a car can miss - oil? flood water? something coming out of "view" of the sensors that a human can anticipate? It will only take one or two serious accidents and the whole thing will come under immense scrutiny and liability for legal actions.
My brother has a brand new top-of-the-range Audi A4 and while using the radar-guided cruise control on a 70mph road it suddenly slowed him to 40mph for no conceivable reason, very dangerous. There were no objects in the road and the only thing he could think was that he was approaching a bridge which had a 40mph limit road over it. Either way he won't be using it again.
My brother has a brand new top-of-the-range Audi A4 and while using the radar-guided cruise control on a 70mph road it suddenly slowed him to 40mph for no conceivable reason, very dangerous. There were no objects in the road and the only thing he could think was that he was approaching a bridge which had a 40mph limit road over it. Either way he won't be using it again.
It will be interesting to see how long it will take for people in general to accept 100's or road deaths a year in driverless cars and be happy with it.
Whilst every injury and death is a bad thing, it's pretty impossible to argue that (make up some numbers) 1000 people killed each year in a driverless cars, is worse than 5000 killed in a hum,an driven cars.
What is the lesser evil ?
Ban driverless cars and have more deaths?
I suspect actually driverless cars will be very safe, as for the most part, they won't get into the situations to cause the accident in the 1st place. Driving too close, driving too fast in poor conditions, not looking where going, not noticing something coming the other way......
I suspect they will be quite slow and safe, which may well annoy many used to zipping in and our quickly around.
Whilst every injury and death is a bad thing, it's pretty impossible to argue that (make up some numbers) 1000 people killed each year in a driverless cars, is worse than 5000 killed in a hum,an driven cars.
What is the lesser evil ?
Ban driverless cars and have more deaths?
I suspect actually driverless cars will be very safe, as for the most part, they won't get into the situations to cause the accident in the 1st place. Driving too close, driving too fast in poor conditions, not looking where going, not noticing something coming the other way......
I suspect they will be quite slow and safe, which may well annoy many used to zipping in and our quickly around.
I have heard the same thing from Google Maps users anecdotal experiences and occasionally Google Maps takes me to the wrong place or has an outdated map locations. Those are fortunately infrequent occurrences on both Google and Apple Maps. If they were typical experiences, the significant, but clear minority of iPhone users who use Google Maps would stop doing so. Similarly, the large majority of iPhone users use Apple Maps to the extent that they use it many billions of times a week. Obviously those hundreds of millions of Apple Maps users would switch to something else if it provided inaccurate directions.
As far as your stated "dangerous situation" that caused you to "draw the line" against using Apple Maps, you must realize that no one believes your example? The idea that there would be an interstate anywhere in America where the construction company wouldn't have had physical barriers in place well before a bridge under construction that would not allow people to inadvertently drive off the bridge into the water is a ludricous claim. It's okay to prefer Google Maps, without making things up things up. I think it still has a superior search capability, and has visual Lane Assist which Apple hasn't implemented yet. Not giving up my privacy to Google is worth the trade off to me.
The other good news is that Apple is suppose to complete its base map this year. They have been working on it for several years and 2017/2018 should be the time period for some exciting innovations in Apple Maps.
This ^^^^
Roads and transportation infrastructure must be built/retrofitted with sensors, to becoming "active". That, and only that, will enable zero-day, spot decisions that circumvent FOOBAR results,
Last edited:
Apple has been building a much better "street view." Street View needs to be redone as it was a great innovation at the time, but now is a pretty clunky app to use. Apple has building a completely new base map and will likely have a breakthrough eye in the sky down to street level smooth experience to surpass Google's street view. Competition is great. Base Map is supposed to be complete 2017/2018, cross your fingers the thousands working on it and Maps, and the billions spent pay off in next gen mapping.