Google Moving Closer to Submitting Maps App for iOS as Eddy Cue Works to Improve Apple's Maps

[jctevere]

With all this fancy-schmantzy integration of Siri and "amazing turn-by-turn" directions. I have yet to experience the simplicity of asking Siri:

"Where is the intersection of Menaul and Candelaria?"

It spells it right, but always comes up with some non-sensical location. Is there any map app on the market that I can look up a !@#$ INTERSECTION!?

...Sorry... It just bugs me when someone says they're near x and y, and I don't have an address, it SHOULD route me there, but can't...

Most likely because Menaul and Candelaria never intersect... LMAO. Siri does just fine at locating intersections, even regarding that exact area:

I like how she says she's not sure that this result is what I meant, most likely because I am in New York. But after checking the Maps, it pin-pointed the exact location... So yes, it can do intersection, next time try to provide actual intersection, and it helps to include a city or at the very least, the state.

 

[faroZ06]

There are two things that suck in Apple Maps.

1. The data
2. The app/maps

The data is incomplete, satellite images aren't what they should, etc. We know about this.

However, the maps are displayed very ugly. Google Maps is much cleaner, offers more detail. In order to get the same level of detail in Apple Maps, you have to zoom in a lot more than you have to with Google Maps. Suppose Apple Maps had all the POI's and all map data was perfect, it would still be inferior to Google due to this!

Other things that suck in Apple Maps:
- Transit
- Traffic information
- No street view
- Blurry satellite images (you have to zoom in more than you had to with Google Maps)
- Not showing buildings, when you are on a normal zoom level, you only see white lines of streets. This doesn't really tell you anything. Are you in the middle of nowhere or in the middle of a big city? You can't spot the difference.
- Normal streets being display as narrow alleys
- Unclear distinction between different road types/terrain types, etc.
- Ugliness in general.

Apple Maps sucks on all kinds of levels.

Yeah, but I was asking for specific locations where the map data is bad or the pictures bad. Everywhere I've looked at has been basically the same as Google Maps except for Faroe Islands, which they fixed a while ago.

 

[laserbeam273]

If Google includes turn-by-turn in their app now, why didn't they just do it before? Wasn't Google's refusal to include this feature, part of the reason Apple dropped their maps app in the first place?

They didn't do it before probably to gimp Apple's iOS ecosystem. So even though Apple's getting a really bad rap for their decision, it was mostly brought on by Google.

And now of course they'll add it all so they look like the heros.

 

[dv8r]

Yeah, but I was asking for specific locations where the map data is bad or the pictures bad. Everywhere I've looked at has been basically the same as Google Maps except for Faroe Islands, which they fixed a while ago.

Aarhus, Denmark - Apart from the basic error of Apple spelling it wrong (one "A")... 4 Hospitals 2 of them missing (one build in 1986 the other in the 1920's), the other 2 swapped. Several major roads wrong or missing, cemeterys marked as "community gardens", building outlines mostly wrong and the list goes on... And this is just basic map errors, not even POI related (link is to another debate to avoid too repetition):

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/15894095/

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/16052800/

 

[Snookerman]

Google Maps?

No Thanks. Pass

Your opinion?

No Thanks. Pass

 

[msandersen]

If Google includes turn-by-turn in their app now, why didn't they just do it before? Wasn't Google's refusal to include this feature, part of the reason Apple dropped their maps app in the first place?

The previous Maps app was Apple's; the point of contention was Google's refusal to provide access to the turn-by-turn directions as well as their Vector maps for inclusion in the Apple app; neither was available when the original contract was signed, and apparently Google didn't care to extend it, at least not under whatever conditions or licensing was offered.

 

[ChrisTX]

Actually thats not true at all. Open up your browser and type in youtube.com

m.youtube.com looks better, but it's still not on par with the old iPad App. Don't misunderstand me I still love my iPad, but I hate that Apple is removing core functionality that us users want just to spite Google.

 

[Dolorian]

Don't misunderstand me I still love my iPad, but I hate that Apple is removing core functionality that us users want just to spite Google.

I think that when it comes to YouTube it was more a mutual agreement between both parties to not renew the contract. Not sure about this tho.

 

[anthonyp01]

Does Google really need Apple?

 

[Dolorian]

Does Google really need Apple?

Do they need any specific Apple product/service? No. But they do benefit from the large user base that iOS devices have and so seek to have a presence in the platform by releasing their apps and services for it.

That said, Google doesn't hates Apple, they use heavily their products within the company and have no issue showing them in their own commercials and use them in their own presentations and talks.

 

[AdonisSMU]

m.youtube.com looks better, but it's still not on par with the old iPad App. Don't misunderstand me I still love my iPad, but I hate that Apple is removing core functionality that us users want just to spite Google.

Im sorry but I always hated the old Youtube app. I was glad when Apple kicked it off. However google put up a youtube app in the apple store. I liked the HTML 5 youtube site so much that I didnt even bother with the stinkiin app. Youtube is not core functionality. I dont understand why someone would want a less featured version of the website as an iOS app when the performance is the same and secondly its not even easy to grab the url and share the video with people outside of fb and twitter.

 

[Svend]

I can't wait. Having a maps app that is functional would be awesome. I'm sick of the Apple maps already and it's "no results found" for about 50% of what I've searched for. Useless.

 

[0098386]

At this point, a lot of Apple Maps issues have been fixed. Does anyone know of areas where it still sucks?

(From experience)
Large areas of the UK are in greyscale.
Looking for a place in one city (where you'd think they would focus on) was off by 28 miles.
Couldn't find basic things like "Euston Travelodge" whilst Google maps web browser app did. (This happens a LOT for me. It is awful at searching)
Needs streetview or a competitive service.

It's awful in the UK. And Googles maps weren't. That's enough for me to never use Apple maps again. If you don't have it working as good as the predecessor you don't replace it until it's ready.

 

[gnasher729]

The executives at Apple are damn fools if they reject Google's native Maps app. It is going to take a few years of development, refinement and user input to bring Apple's mapping system up to par. It was foolish for Apple to drop Google maps in the first place (the switch was due to Jobs throwing a hissy fit over Android) and it would simply be retarded to block an industry-standard killer app like that from the App Store.

1. A major reason for Apple Maps was that Apple paid tons of money to Google for the map data, and for reasons that should be obvious Apple would rather pay money to anyone _but_ Google. If Google puts its own app on the App Store then Apple doesn't pay a penny for it.

2. Google engineers have been spreading that they expect their app to be rejected. Now any app can be rejected for legitimate reasons. For example for privacy violations, which from recent history I wouldn't put past Google ($22.5 million fine for circumventing Safari and IE privacy settings).

3. Now if Google's map application was rejected for legitimate reasons, there would be an uproar from the Google fanatics. To be honest, in Apple's place I would say "look, guys, your engineers have been spreading these stories on the internet that we are going to reject their app. In that situation, we don't think we can review the app. So until you retract these stories, your app won't be reviewed". That's what I would do.

4. Getting good mapping data isn't something that can be done by a small number of very clever people. You need an awful lot of people who are reliable, conscientious, patient, and shouldn't be too stupid but need not be exceedingly clever either. _That_ is something that is new to Apple and that they seem to struggle with at the moment. I hope that will change. (Like you can't build Streetview with a dozen very clever people; you need 1000 people who drive around the country all day).

 

[HishamAkhtar]

But will Apple realize that there is life outside United States of America ?

They will, and it'll take time. But the YouTube and Maps app were lacking in iOS 5 and when Apple threw them out of the native OS, suddenly Google made better apps. It's no coincidence.

 

[kdarling]

The previous Maps app was Apple's; the point of contention was Google's refusal to provide access to the turn-by-turn directions as well as their Vector maps for inclusion in the Apple app; neither was available when the original contract was signed, and apparently Google didn't care to extend it, at least not under whatever conditions or licensing was offered.

Map companies make most of their money selling their data to navigation device makers and/or automobile manufacturers.

That's why various public map APIs (like Google or Bing) for the past ten years have always had a ban on using the data for turn-by-turn navigation. The map data companies don't want to cut their own revenue by giving info away for others to make apps/money from.

It's probably not even up to Google to allow using the data for turn-by-turn through their APIs or not. Anyone wanting turn-by-turn (Apple or otherwise) would either have to negotiate directly with the data providers, or simply allow the use of the Google app.

 

[jctevere]

Map companies make most of their money selling their data to navigation device makers and/or automobile manufacturers.

That's why various public map APIs (like Google or Bing) for the past ten years have always had a ban on using the data for turn-by-turn navigation. The map data companies don't want to cut their own revenue by giving info away for others to make apps/money from.

It's probably not even up to Google to allow using the data for turn-by-turn through their APIs or not. Anyone wanting turn-by-turn (Apple or otherwise) would either have to negotiate directly with the data providers, or simply allow the use of the Google app.

This is untrue. Shortly after Google Maps became popular on mobile devices, Google stopped using 3rd party data and built their own database which they own. They wouldn't have to pay any fees to anyone, they own everything now.

 

[jshulman10]

There are two things that suck in Apple Maps.

1. The data
2. The app/maps

The data is incomplete, satellite images aren't what they should, etc. We know about this.

However, the maps are displayed very ugly. Google Maps is much cleaner, offers more detail. In order to get the same level of detail in Apple Maps, you have to zoom in a lot more than you have to with Google Maps. Suppose Apple Maps had all the POI's and all map data was perfect, it would still be inferior to Google due to this!

Other things that suck in Apple Maps:
- Transit
- Traffic information
- No street view
- Blurry satellite images (you have to zoom in more than you had to with Google Maps)
- Not showing buildings, when you are on a normal zoom level, you only see white lines of streets. This doesn't really tell you anything. Are you in the middle of nowhere or in the middle of a big city? You can't spot the difference.
- Normal streets being display as narrow alleys
- Unclear distinction between different road types/terrain types, etc.
- Ugliness in general.

Apple Maps sucks on all kinds of levels.

I don't know what your talking about. Apples maps does lack data, but excels in the user-ability/UI design. Apples maps are much cleaner and are much more fluid. The only thing holding Apples maps back is the lack of up-to-date data. "ugliness in general" were did you get your sense of design from?

 

[Oletros]

This is untrue. Shortly after Google Maps became popular on mobile devices, Google stopped using 3rd party data and built their own database which they own. They wouldn't have to pay any fees to anyone, they own everything now.

No, they don't own all the data.

 

[token787]

Huh? How is Google doing so exactly? By releasing Google Maps as a standalone app? Hardly, their maps is a direct competitor to Apple's as is their voice search to Siri. Google releasing their maps and voice search for iOS has more to do with Google wanting to keep iOS users as an audience than with getting into Apple's good grace.

Evidentally, Apple cancelled their contract with Google early and was trying to separate from them and told them they didn't need Google maps but Google still don't get it that Apple want them to disappear. very time Google offer Apple something they turn it down.

 

[BlueParadox]

Hi. Spare me the I just did the search again several times on my iPad and Cairns is still showing in the Daintree rainforest well North of the airport, and not on the coast.

I also did the same search with my brand new iPhone 5 and Cairns is in the correct location.

I just updated a few Apps so I know my iPad has Internet connectivity. It seems the Maps App is unable to determine if cached map data is stale so it can download the updated maps. Great job Apple.

-ITG

Ah well, just searched for Cairns on an iPhone 5, iPad 3, iPhone 4S, and iPad mini - all show the town to be in the right location. Indeed, great job Apple

 

[kdarling]

This is untrue. Shortly after Google Maps became popular on mobile devices, Google stopped using 3rd party data and built their own database which they own. They wouldn't have to pay any fees to anyone, they own everything now.

Thanks for the updated info. Is that true all around the world?

 

[AidenShaw]

headline comment - try to avoid the hero worship

... as Eddy Cue Works to Improve Apple's Maps

Don't you mean "as Eddy Cue's team Works to Improve Apple's Maps"?

I really doubt that Eddie Cue is writing any code for the app or updating any map database information.

Does Jony Ive design all of Apple's hardware, or is he leading a team of hundreds doing most of the work?

Cue and Ive and the other execs are leading large teams of people. MR should recognize the team effort. ...and it would be as simple as adding the word "team" when appropriate.

This headline should have had the phrase "Eddy Cue's team" instead of "Eddy Cue". Simple.

The turtlenecked one is gone - it's time to recognize that there are lots of talented people at Apple. It's never been a "one man show", although sometimes "one man" didn't try hard enough to avoid that perception.

And even as Apple devolves into a more siloed structure - the heads of those siloes are not "mini-Jobs", they're team leaders. Don't treat them as mini-gods....

 

[adder7712]

I've had Android for the past year prior to switching to the 5. Android always found my destination, despite being off by a few hundred feet at times. With the iPhone, in IL, about 20% of the time it places me on the wrong street.

When I was in Oklahoma last month, Apple's couldn't find the International Airport!!! OKC

Still not as worst as this city in my country that is entirely in black and white.

 

[jctevere]

No, they don't own all the data.

Yes... They do...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19536269

I believe sometime in 2010 Google dumped third party data in a majority of countries. This was the main reason behind Street View. Not only does street view provide pictures of the area providing a "virtual tour", but Google's software also analyses the pictures captured through their Street View project to find road signs and other pertinent information. See below picture for more information on the matter.

----------

Thanks for the updated info. Is that true all around the world?

Not 100% world-wide, but in a majority of the countries. See the picture below for more information: