There's plenty of other map apps though so don't see why Apple would stop another, ie google.
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.
Wow. Apple Maps is a disaster.
- Thread starter b24pgg
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's plenty of other map apps though so don't see why Apple would stop another, ie google.
Oh, give me a break. That's crap. A mapping application should NEVER use a dirt road as a substitution for highways and qualified secondary roads. That's all this app is doing. It's using highways only as a conduit to get to "roads" it considers more direct regardless of their driveability.
I had it plot a route from my home to the nearest large city which EVERY other hardware GPS or mapping application uses two highways and an Interstate to get there. It's really a very easy calculation. The Apple decision was to use the highway for approximately 3 of that 35 mile trip and then switch to secondary and tertiary roads for the entirety of the rest of the calculation. It only used the highway because it had to. It completely ignored primary roads for its entire calculation for all three of its suggested routes. Not one of those routes used the Interstate at all. The worst of the three routes took a 35 mile trip and made it into 62.
On its preferred route, it immediately went from the highway to several miles on a road that I would only travel on with my 4WD. Yes, it's really that bad of a road. Mapping data does contain road classifications and speed assignments. That's how smart GPS navigation systems work.
As far as your statement, "No navigation app is going to give you the shortest/best route you prefer." Bull. Google navigation has not failed me in directions in nearly two years and the only time it failed me in that time was to misidentify which lane of an Interstate was the proper one to be in for an exit.
Stop defending this piece of refuse because this was clearly not ready to be released yet. This is Google Maps circa 2007.
Last edited:
Already have it. It's one of the worst web apps I've used to date. Clunky and slow and glitchy. Far from a native iOS app. Unfortunately this will not do.
The only realistic choices are:
1. iOS 10 Maps (in 2020)
2. Keep using iOS 5 Google Maps (until 2020)
3. Wait for an iOS 6 version of Google Maps
4. Force Apple revert back to the original iOS 5 Google App via bad press
5. Drive over to Capt Cook's house and hold his cat hostage until he caves in
I guess you haven't seen any improvement since the first beta, I'm very happy with it all
ok, how about Apple has approved a boatload of other Maps apps already? Does that address his argument?
I was terrified reading this thread as accurate directions are important to us in making deliveries to new places, but I ran a dozen tests in the Seattle area and they all worked.
I can understand the complaints that exist and I did find one minor error (a just completed road isn't showing up yet), but it looks like I'm one of the lucky ones as the features that don't exist are the ones that I never used and so I won't miss them.
I can understand the complaints that exist and I did find one minor error (a just completed road isn't showing up yet), but it looks like I'm one of the lucky ones as the features that don't exist are the ones that I never used and so I won't miss them.
They all use Apple's mapping framework, MapKit.
Like Chrome, Safari and other browsers are all just basically skins over UIWebView, all map apps probably just are front ends to MapKit, thus subject to using the same backend data (which is what is flawed here) as Apple does in their own map.
People asking for a "Google Maps" app don't want a front-end, they want a whole other backend, something that replaces MapKit. Apple have not been very kind to accepting such duplicate functionality in the past.
Apple did sort of unceremoniously drop that requirment a while back, as noted by the introduction of alternate browsers (limited as they may be) and email clients.
Read what I just posted. And address that argument.
----------
There are no alternate browsers on iOS. Only alternate skins on top of UIWebView. Chrome, Safari, Omni, whatever, they're simply alternate UIs. Safari though is the only one able to use Nitro as a javascript engine, which it gives it an unfair advantage over others.
(Opera Mini bypassed the rule by simply doing rendering server side and essentially giving you a "image viewer" which displays pre-rendered images).
You only have the illusion of alternate browsers, you don't have actual alternate browsers. The situation with maps is the same (UIWebView/MapKit vs Other HTML engine/Other mapping backend).
One way arrows are so small now and on smaller streets they're basically impossible to see. Apps like Bikester have highlighted bike lanes above the street, covering the arrows. This is so lame when you live in a big city like NYC where almost all streets are one way.
Maps needs a LOT of work. The public transportation issue is one of the biggest fails I've ever seen when it comes to native apps. Those who don't use the public transportation tab must not live in a major city or travel very much. I'm hoping this gets resolved soon, or Google releases an app ASAP.
Here's a comparison of Apple Maps and Google Maps from my current location. Not much difference, with the exception of Google showing a couple POI.
And Google...
And Google...
I have a question, where the heck is the traffic data?
I live in Orlando and literally not one road has data for it.
I live in Orlando and literally not one road has data for it.
Wow great comparison chiefpavvy.
I can find areas of the maps that look okay too, but that doesn't counteract the millions of errors.
You mean that satellite data from a 1973 Russian spy satellite doesn't really cut it?
Wrong.
That data is from from Voyager 1. After it passed Saturn.
Wow come to think of it, I've seen better imagery come back from Mars than I do in some of these areas.
Me think the lady doth protest too much.
No one in this thread is going to boycott Apple because of this. Apple knows it so they shove pos apps like this down your throats.
Maybe one day consumers will say enough is enough and force Apple to produce quality. Especially since the phone costs $750 and is often late with application and features. If they are going to be late to the game, they should make it better than what's out there. In this case, they failed again.
No one in this thread is going to boycott Apple because of this. Apple knows it so they shove pos apps like this down your throats.
Maybe one day consumers will say enough is enough and force Apple to produce quality. Especially since the phone costs $750 and is often late with application and features. If they are going to be late to the game, they should make it better than what's out there. In this case, they failed again.
Please leave Apple negative feedback on Maps: http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
It's the only way they'll listen.
It's the only way they'll listen.
I've seen all of these comparisons with Google but no one has done one with TomTom's own map data. After looking at some of the incorrect labels I found these to be correct in the TomTom map.
Seems to be more of a problem with Apple's implementation of the data rather than at least some of the data. Seems strange how this has been messed up so much if indeed they are using TomTom data for settlement labels.
EDIT: Crewe is incorrectly labelled Wrexham Crewe in Apple Maps
Leamington Spa is named Royal Spa in Apple Maps
Wombourne is spelt Wombourn in Apple Maps
All of which are correct in the sourced data we know Apple are using.
Seems to be more of a problem with Apple's implementation of the data rather than at least some of the data. Seems strange how this has been messed up so much if indeed they are using TomTom data for settlement labels.
EDIT: Crewe is incorrectly labelled Wrexham Crewe in Apple Maps
Leamington Spa is named Royal Spa in Apple Maps
Wombourne is spelt Wombourn in Apple Maps
All of which are correct in the sourced data we know Apple are using.
Attachments
Last edited:
I'm trying to understand Apple's logic when designating "main roads". Its way off from what Tom Tom has. Took me a minute to figure out where in the pic they both matched up.
Here is a UK example:
This is the centre of Nottingham, the sixth largest city in the UK:
Google Maps website:
Apple Maps app:
The Google version - and this is zoomed out pretty far - shows far more information than the Apple map.
You have to zoom-in much further to actually see detail on Apple's Map, and much of what there is - in Nottingham anyway - is either in the wrong place (streets away) or just plain wrong.
If you try to use the "Satellite" option, all you get is a dull grey picture which is completely illegible.
Far better perhaps would have been for Apple to release their app *alongside* Google's rather than replacing it.
It seems the data needs a huge amount of work.
This is the centre of Nottingham, the sixth largest city in the UK:
Google Maps website:
Apple Maps app:
The Google version - and this is zoomed out pretty far - shows far more information than the Apple map.
You have to zoom-in much further to actually see detail on Apple's Map, and much of what there is - in Nottingham anyway - is either in the wrong place (streets away) or just plain wrong.
If you try to use the "Satellite" option, all you get is a dull grey picture which is completely illegible.
Far better perhaps would have been for Apple to release their app *alongside* Google's rather than replacing it.
It seems the data needs a huge amount of work.
Read what I just posted. And address that argument.
----------
There are no alternate browsers on iOS. Only alternate skins on top of UIWebView. Chrome, Safari, Omni, whatever, they're simply alternate UIs. Safari though is the only one able to use Nitro as a javascript engine, which it gives it an unfair advantage over others.
(Opera Mini bypassed the rule by simply doing rendering server side and essentially giving you a "image viewer" which displays pre-rendered images).
You only have the illusion of alternate browsers, you don't have actual alternate browsers. The situation with maps is the same (UIWebView/MapKit vs Other HTML engine/Other mapping backend).
I use an alternate email client (Sparrow).
Also noticed that in Googles map, Burton is connected to Milton. Not the case in Apple's map. Which one is correct?