I'm less concerned about transit and walking routing (because I am sure Apple will get there), but more concerned about search of maps. OSM search is currently nowhere near the level of Google maps search.
On google maps I can search for things like "usps near south lake tahoe" and it do what I expect. Try that on OSM, or anything remotely not a well formed address. Google maps has some sophisticated logic for biasing towards current location, and it knows the names of places, like 'moscone center', or 'facebook offices'. And of coruse, I cna mispel them all and it still find it.
If Apple maps can't do the same, then no matter how pretty the 3D view is, it will disable one of the main (for me) functions of the device.
I've switched from iPhone to Android and back to an iPhone again, and the only things I liked better about the Android were Swype and the Maps. The iPhone app is at least now servicable. The 6.0 will break it for me (I use transit directions all the time), so I'm left hoping Google saves the day.
Walking directions work.
Also, the maps are (IMO) significantly worse in quality than Google Maps. Turn by turn is nice though. Something that Google Maps should have implemented a long time ago.
It will interesting to see what the Google Maps app introduces and whether Apple accepts it.
The build-in Android map application has had turn by turn for some time now.
At least it was for me when I bought my Nexus One unlocked after eBaying a free-on-contract HTC Pure instead of getting the iPhone 3G(S? not sure if it was out back then)
No they couldn't, Apple controlled the app, Google was just the pipe. A recent WSJ article claims that both Google and Apple wanted feature parity/turn by turn, but Google wanted an increased amount of Google branding in exchange which Apple refused so they ultimately couldn't come to terms.
If they came out with their own Google Maps application that had feature parity with the Android app, I would imagine that most iOS users would switch immediately to that app instead of Apple's built-in one.
That could have potentially cost Google a lot of money, assuming that Apple was paying on a per-use basis.
(fwiw, turn by turn and maps are great on my Android)
I'm skeptical about this.
Which kind of quality are you referring to? Image-wise? In terms accurate representations of the environment?
Both Google(Where2, ZipDash, Keyhole, Endoxon, ImageAmerica, Quiksee & Zagat) and Apple(Placebase, Poly9 & C3) have formed their mapping arms via acquisitions. Both companies are large and well resourced enough to innovate here. It's looking good for both platforms.