Wow. Apple Maps is a disaster.

[cyks]

While that's horrible, and I see Apple's Maps as a kind of swindle (they're ripping customers off by taking away a valuable service that customers paid for, without warning and without consent, and they're benefiting at customers' expense by forcing them to tolerate the growing pains of a half-baked system, something no one volunteered to do), couldn't you have compared Apple's routes with Navigon's or Google's before you left home?

We shouldn't have or be expected to.

I have driven across the country a few times with nothing more than a Rand McNally paper map. Not once did I think I should verify the info against another map's data. When I lived in Los Angeles, I had just a Thomas Guide to get me around. Again, I never thought to confirm the info before I left the house.

Since then, I have used a GSP unit and now an iPhone... each for years without (major) problem. Suddenly, thanks to Apple's "upgrade," that all changes- and I'm forced to not trust maps or suffer.

 

[avaloncourt]

couldn't you have compared Apple's routes with Navigon's or Google's before you left home?

So, I'm expected to compare dozens of line item directions against another source? As cyks said above, "We shouldn't have or be expected to."

The second stop I was going to was unfamiliar from the direction I was coming. I knew things were wrong but I didn't know enough about that area to pinpoint where it was failing. The rest of the routes I knew quickly as it went running off on wild routing that it was simply getting it horribly wrong.

I gave maps an honest 5 chances spread across a variety of environments from highly urban to rural and it failed 80% of the time with the last 20% being acceptable, although rather odd.

I'll be leaving my future routing to an app I trust.

 

[dmelgar]

So, I'm expected to compare dozens of line item directions against another source? As cyks said above, "We shouldn't have or be expected to."

I gave maps an honest 5 chances spread across a variety of environments from highly urban or rural and it failed 80% of the time with the last 20% being acceptable, although rather odd.

I'll be leaving my future routing to an app I trust.

Works great for me in my area. What area or country are you in?

Why is it not acceptable to use google maps in safari? It didn't have turn by turn before, still doesn't.

Coming from android, I found the lack of turn by turn a major deficiency. I haven't had any problems with turn by turn and love the Siri integration.

 

[sch11]

Agreed that Apple shouldn't force a bad service on you, particularly when you expected to have access to an extremely high quality service when you decided to get the phone and enter a service contract with a carrier.

All I was saying was that if you knew many people were complaining about how bad the service is, it might have made sense to double check things before going out on a long trip. Not that you should have to do that as a general matter or that it's okay that Apple has ruined a key service on millions of devices.

 

[PhoneandPad]

I have just updated my 4s to IOS6. I am very disappointed with the maps. How do I revert to the previous IOS with Google maps?

People should be very careful not to accept the upgrade to IOS 6 prompts on their iThing. The download is done sneakily in the background so you have no way of stopping it or going back if you accept.

If IOS 6 is ever Jailbroken, there'll be a big industry in reverting to IOS 5, or spoofing it so that IOS 5 mapping can be used. Even then, there may be no way of going back unless you have 'saved your blob'.

I am now looking at the idea of selling off the iThings in favour of Android, due to the better future proofing (hackable=futureproof).

In which case Apple will be losing an nice little income stream on all the Apps I buy from time to time, and Google will be gaining same.

 

[shandyman]

Can you share the location search so we can see?

I gave screenshots. You can clearly see they correspond to each other......

 

[SlCKB0Y]

I gave screenshots. You can clearly see they correspond to each other......

Funny thing is though Google has different imagery for different zoom levels. People in this thread have tried to point out problems with Google sat images and most of the time they have been very selective about the zoom because the issue isn't present at either higher or lower levels.

I can only presume you are engaging in this same kind of behaviour as well.

----------

Why is it not acceptable to use google maps in safari? It didn't have turn by turn before, still doesn't.

It doesn't integrate with other applications and it can't use the compass.

Coming from android, I found the lack of turn by turn a major deficiency. I haven't had any problems with turn by turn and love the Siri integration.

That's strange because Google Maps on Android has had turn by turn navigation in my country for years.

 

[smoking monkey]

There's no doubting that Google maps at this point in time is A LOT BETTER in terms of accuracy. Simply put there is no comparison and Apple should be embarrassed by what they have released...

But once Apple gets up to speed their maps app will be excellent.

I've found it to be faster than the old maps app using google maps. It's easier to use. And the turn by turn directions are well done. my old app didn't have this option.

In fact I've used it and it worked perfectly (I got lucky) while I was riding a scooter no less! I had it at my feet and could hear it telling me where to go and if I took a quick look down it was really easy to follow.

I found the way they use pins to be better and easier than google maps. So far it just feels more intuitive.

But I can't really trust it yet. Its accuracy is too skittish at this point. SO hurry up Apple and fix the bluddy thing!

 

[dv8r]

Where are you standing in NY when that happens?

If I'm looking at NYC and type in "14th street" it brings up a bunch of businesses on 14th street or that have 14th street in their name.

This was at Williams/Exchange, downtown. If I do this now (from Europe) it will take me to either Boise or Cacuta (Colombia)[1]. The first one is their context search failing big time, the second one is just plain weird.

[1]

 

[dv8r]

Golden Gate what? Bridge? park? Both of those come up in the search area if you just enter golden gate. There are probably hundreds golden gates in the country and the world...and it still brings those two up as the first choices...again, what were you expecting?

Obviously I want it to bring up Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco - this is one (of many) ways of implementing context search, simple look at what most people will be looking for. And, I'd might add, something I would expect since San Francisco is what's covered extensively in Apple Maps. The whole argument here is that their search functionality is so bad that it will get you nowhere unless you use the whole address - kinda not why you want to use search.

I happened to be looking at the Golden Gate Bridge from your first question and typed in "Van Ness Ave" and hit search and it takes me to Van Ness Ave in San Francisco. Where were you searching from and which one were you searching for?

Yes I see a pattern here - it will try to find the nearest thing (to a limited extend) instead of the most likely. Search "Golden Gate Bridge" and jump to San Francisco, after that search Van Ness Ave and it will get the one in San Francisco correctly. Search and jump to New York City and then searching Van Ness Ave will bring up Pompton Plains NJ and Greenville NC instead.

Being totally serious here...I was not able to repeat what you claim.

See above.

 

[monkey28rb]

After the issues I had this past weekend, I do not trust the Maps at all. They have a long ways to go.

 

[avaloncourt]

Works great for me in my area. What area or country are you in?

Why is it not acceptable to use google maps in safari? It didn't have turn by turn before, still doesn't.

Coming from android, I found the lack of turn by turn a major deficiency. I haven't had any problems with turn by turn and love the Siri integration.

Apparently you didn't read the original post. It was in Pennsylvania near the New York line.

I, too, came back from Android and have always previously used Google Navigation. There is a large faction here defending Maps. When the iPhone 5 was released I had it calculate several nearby test destinations and they were awful. With all of the proponents of Maps, I decided to give it a legitimate, good-faith test that would cover a variety of driving environments.

When I previously had the iPhone I had Navigon and I had reloaded it on the 5. I could have used Navigon but I decided to give the Maps cheerleaders a chance and let Maps direct me that day. It was an utter failure.

 

[MozMan68]

Obviously I want it to bring up Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco - this is one (of many) ways of implementing context search, simple look at what most people will be looking for. And, I'd might add, something I would expect since San Francisco is what's covered extensively in Apple Maps. The whole argument here is that their search functionality is so bad that it will get you nowhere unless you use the whole address - kinda not why you want to use search.



Yes I see a pattern here - it will try to find the nearest thing (to a limited extend) instead of the most likely. Search "Golden Gate Bridge" and jump to San Francisco, after that search Van Ness Ave and it will get the one in San Francisco correctly. Search and jump to New York City and then searching Van Ness Ave will bring up Pompton Plains NJ and Greenville NC instead.



See above.

Okay...but typing in "golden gate" brings up Golden Gate Bridge as the first item in the search bar. Yes...just hitting return brings you to the nearest "golden gate" item (or not..yes, an issue), but the bridge actually comes up as the first selection...why not tap on it?

Would you NOT expect it to bring up the Van Ness in NJ since that is the closest one if the map is currently centered on that area?

 

[dv8r]

Okay...but typing in "golden gate" brings up Golden Gate Bridge as the first item in the search bar. Yes...just hitting return brings you to the nearest "golden gate" item (or not..yes, an issue), but the bridge actually comes up as the first selection...why not tap on it?

No. It brings up Golden Gate Bridge because you have searched for that before - that's why it has a different icon (magnifying Glass). It kinda negates the meaning of searching a map program if I'm forced to write the exact name/place. It's also unknown how long those searches stay in your list, so you could be back where you started again in a short while or after a few other searches.

Would you NOT expect it to bring up the Van Ness in NJ since that is the closest one if the map is currently centered on that area?

Because context search (amongst other things) mean that if I search around San Francisco and New York and write Van Ness Ave, it would likely be in one of those two places. Even more context would be that roughly 99% of all searches on Van Ness Ave is for the one in San Francisco.

Another example is searching for a rather common term like "Hovedgaden" (Danish for "Main Street") - it doesn't bring up the nearest one (4 miles away), but a random selection, the nearest being 30 miles away...

 

[iCUP]

I think there is an update of the Map coming out shortly. This is a bug and Apple knows of it.

I personally used it twice and stopped. My Garmin is keeping me from getting lost on the road and I'm on the road alot!

C'MON Apple, please fix this! I have several other complaints with iOS6 but this isn't the right thread and time to voice out.

 

[MozMan68]

No. It brings up Golden Gate Bridge because you have searched for that before - that's why it has a different icon (magnifying Glass). It kinda negates the meaning of searching a map program if I'm forced to write the exact name/place. It's also unknown how long those searches stay in your list, so you could be back where you started again in a short while or after a few other searches.



Because context search (amongst other things) mean that if I search around San Francisco and New York and write Van Ness Ave, it would likely be in one of those two places. Even more context would be that roughly 99% of all searches on Van Ness Ave is for the one in San Francisco.

Never searched for the bridge before...just tried it on my iPhone where I have only searched local poi's. only got as far as typing "golde" before Golden Gate Bridge came up as the second choice down. And I certainly never searched for the Golden Corral restaurant that came up first (there must be one nearby).

For Van Ness Avenue, you are probably correct about Google throwing the San Franciso one in there based on the number of searches they have had, but I imagine Apple's will do the same once that database is utilized more.

Even searching for it while viewing NJ/NY area brings up New Jersey options for that request.

 

[Edslunch]

Does anyone have experience with Tom Tom and does it have some of same problems? My experience with Garmin is its poi data wasn't extensive but I didn't really expect it to be. What I did expect was cities in the right location

 

[shandyman]

Funny thing is though Google has different imagery for different zoom levels. People in this thread have tried to point out problems with Google sat images and most of the time they have been very selective about the zoom because the issue isn't present at either higher or lower levels.

I can only presume you are engaging in this same kind of behaviour as well.

Haha really? You can clearly see then side by side, pretty much at the same zoom level....

Edit: I've done another comparison, as close to being the exact same zoom level as possible, both screenshots on my iPhone.

Also some zoomed out and zoomed in shots, google maps uses same image for each. Even worse is googles datestamp is 2012!

You still want to claim google is perfect??

 

[cyks]

Haha really? You can clearly see then side by side, pretty much at the same zoom level....

Edit: I've done another comparison, as close to being the exact same zoom level as possible, both screenshots on my iPhone.

You still want to claim google is perfect??

Congratulations, you found one part of the UK where Apple's satellite images aren't clouds and are actually newer than those Google uses.

It still seems a silly comparison considering Google has Street View available for that area, has far more POI listed, and shows/ can route you via public transportation.


Of course, I never said Google's offering was perfect... it's just far, far better than what Apple forced upon us.

 

[Jrh1194]

I used a Droid-X for 2 years. During that time I used Google maps for turn by turn navigation. While it worked very well it certainly was not flawless. Apple has acknowledged that there are problems with the Maps app. There is no doubt that they will improve Maps. In hindsight, Apple would have been better off not to release the Maps app until they had tested it further. As Apple customers we would have also been better off....and we would have had to find another feature to complain about.

 

[shandyman]

Congratulations, you found one part of the UK where Apple's satellite images aren't clouds and are actually newer than those Google uses.

It still seems a silly comparison considering Google has Street View available for that area, has far more POI listed, and shows/ can route you via public transportation.


Of course, I never said Google's offering was perfect... it's just far, far better than what Apple forced upon us.

Wow nice to see you didn't read through my post or the one he replied to. Did I say apple maps are perfect? No. I was pointing out that google maps aren't perfect either. They've had that same image for around 7-8 years ago, it's been reported to google as incorrect, they still don't have the roads right, with one clearly running through about 6 houses, parallel to the real road, which they also have.... It's been reported many times over the years. In the beta, apple had the roads the same as google, apple fixed it when GM came out.

I'm just pointing out to all those people that claim google maps are so great, that google aren't perfect and slow to fix things. The only reason they're better on the whole is due to their maps being around longer... Apples maps aren't perfect either, but are improving, a lot of my area has decent satellite maps. Yes some bits are black & white, but I'm sure that'll be dealt with. Navigation has worked perfectly and the public transport has tied in well travelling from Newbury to essex for me, unlike google maps shocking offerings... Google maps bus timetable for my area was extremely wrong and I ended up being late for work when relying on it one day when local trains were screwed...

 

[S.L.]

worked great for me today finding two hard to find locations in northern NJ. mind you Garmin would have taken me twenty miles off course, Google Maps did not give me the best routes and also took me off course, and Mapquest ended up being the closest, yet not as good as Apple Maps. it was imperative I made it to my location on time and Apple Maps did it!

 

[dv8r]

I'm just pointing out to all those people that claim google maps are so great, that google aren't perfect and slow to fix things. The only reason they're better on the whole is due to their maps being around longer... Apples maps aren't perfect either, but are improving, a lot of my area has decent satellite maps. Yes some bits are black & white, but I'm sure that'll be dealt with. Navigation has worked perfectly and the public transport has tied in well travelling from Newbury to essex for me, unlike google maps shocking offerings... Google maps bus timetable for my area was extremely wrong and I ended up being late for work when relying on it one day when local trains were screwed...

I agree with the "Google is also sometimes wrong" statement - it's when You go for the "Google is just as wrong" statement it becomes BS...

 

[SlCKB0Y]

You still want to claim google is perfect??

I never claimed they were perfect. I was simply pointing out that people had previously been very selective about what they were showing in order to make Google maps appear to have more issues than they do.

You were not engaging in this kind of sneaky behaviour and I apologise - you seemed to have found an area where Apple Maps legitimately has better sat images.

 

[blulegend]

Apple Maps has misled me at least 4 times now in San Diego. Busy, established areas too. Map data incorrect a few times and misrouting me twice by changing when and where the next turn should be at the last moment. Also, once it had me going around the block in what would have been an infinite loop.