Apple Says Give Maps Time, The More You Use it The Better It Is | Hacker News Reader

Apple Says Give Maps Time, The More You Use it The Better It Is

thenextweb.com

17 pointscooldeal52 comments

Look at any mapping provider: Google, Bing, Ovi/Nokia, TeleAtlas, OSM... They are ALL way better than Apple. Apple allegedly is using OSM data, yet their maps are ridiculously bad compared to OSM. Town names are missing, there are next to no terrain features at all. Even the coloring is bad (low contrast etc.)

And then there is sattelite imagery, which is sort of fine in the US. But the rest of the world is low resolution, is partly covered in clouds, badly color corrected and partly black and white.

And then there are no public transportation directives and no sensible terrain view.

Apple released a crap product. Aerials won't get better 'the more peopl euse it'. Neither will maps grow more detailed. It's not like people can collaborate to make them better.

To me, those maps seriously diminished the worth of my devices. And this response makes me want to buy an Android phone. It is frankly insulting.

Looks like without Jobs at the helm, quality and customer satisfaction began suffering almost immediately.

It's kind of silly to say that - Apple under Jobs did make several mistakes, over the history of the company. It's just that your recent image of Jobs is someone who was consistently successful, but even there Ping is a good counter example.

To look at a single flaw and then say "oh this is because Jobs is no longer there" is without warrant. Now, if there is a systematic decline in quality of products and services over several months/years, your claim begins to carry more weight.

Well ping may have been unsuccessful, but it didn't harm the customer's experience. People who weren't interested simply didn't use it. In the case of Apple's new maps app, they've actually removed functionality customers came to rely on and replaced it with an inferior product.

Meanwhile I'm having the opposite experience: my phone is more valuable today than it was yesterday.

The driving directions are quite nice, it's vector based so the map can rotate any which way, I think the colors are better at locating nearby green space to visit, and I can click on local restaurants to right to their Yelp reviews. Given the angry mob I was expecting to hate it, but I've actually been impressed.

I think it has a lot to do with where you live, how well Apple localized it for your language, and what features you care about (ex: driving vs. transit).

Isn't google map data vector based too? Their maps rotate on android..

I don't own an android phone. I'm only comparing my iOS map app from yesterday to my iOS map app today.

Interesting. It mostly read like a comparison to an Android phone from almost three years ago.

I'm not sure Apple had done much to update their Maps app in 5 years.

Never on iOS though. Most of the features Google added to the Android version of Maps never made it to iOS, for whatever reason (be it Apple not allowing it or Google decided they didn't want to).

Didnt the old iOS app only use googles data? So, the features have always been in Apples hand.

Apple doesn't seem to be using OSM data in Maps, they're getting it from TomTom. They experimented with OSM in iPhoto, not sure what happened there.

The real problem is that Apple lacks the quality control of Steve Jobs. Nearly everyone I've talked to has said something along the lines of: "Steve Jobs planned out the next three years of Apple's strategy, so Apple is still a power player in the tech industry." What many people forget is that Steve Jobs can no longer veto features because he no longer sees the product before it's released. Steve vetoed ~90% of features that were implemented and sent them back for further development. Tim Cook simply doesn't have the eye that Steve had, and so we're left with products that don't cut it.

The proposition that Jobs, or anyone, could successfully plan a strategy 3 years out in this industry is laughable. Wasn't it less than 3 years ago that Steve was telling us that people would have to file their fingertips down to use a 7" tablet?

Apparently you never experienced Mac OS X 10.0. Or Mobile Me. Or owned an iBook G3.

Steve's quality control is legendary. By that I mean a legend. By that I mean fiction. Steve killed products that didn't fit what he wanted Apple to sell -- that doesn't mean Apple had perfect QC under his watch.

Mainly, Apple has had way more success than most companies in getting a product 80% right out of the gate and not too many huge embarrassing failures - more a series of small or moderate failures.

The current Maps failures seem to be moderate but could wind up being big.

"Jobs was not being perfect at QA, and frequently made questionable decisions" does not contradict "Jobs was better than Cook at QA".

The problem Apple has is that Google Maps is awesome and they somehow have to top that. When Google Maps came out there was nothing to compare it to, it was so far ahead and so much better than anything else.

I think Apple has a difficult task ahead to "reinvent" maps. Also, do maps need reinventing?

That's an astute observation; and quite amusing since it is exactly the opposite of how Android/iOS played out for them. Apple revolutionized the mobile phone experience with an astounding product and Google spent the following 4 years iterating on a copycat until they just recently closed the gap.

The browser, maps, and email were the core functionality and appeal of the smart phone. Two were provided by google (maps and gmail native) and the third had google search set as default.

Apple didn't have to top Google, or even equal them. All they had to do was come out with a competent product.

There were several options:

1) Realize that they weren't ready, suck it up, and negotiate with Google to keep their map as the primary product, until they were ready.

2) Decide that, strategically, they couldn't go with Google, so they would use some other third party - Bing, for instance, has some nice maps - but I'm sure those who know more than me could identify the partner would have been appropriate. They could have used this time to develop their mapping platform.

But, they decided to go with the third option:

3) Try to build a mapping platform before they were ready to, and deliver an inferior product to their customers, albeit with some flashy "3D building" touring.

They put the icing on the cake before the substances was ready.

Now, ironically - I'm personally in no way effected. Living in the Bay Area, everything that I want from a mapping product right now is there. I quite like the IOS 6 product.

But, it doesn't stop me from noting that Apple delivered a sub-optimal product, when they had the choice to do otherwise. It seems to be the blind-spot in their DNA - they are able to build great physical products, and competent operating systems - but web services continue to be a challenge for them to bring the same fit and finish to.

Does Bing have a mobile solution for 3rd parties?

Apple's Advertisement should say: "You've never seen maps like this before"

Truly ;)

Apple to entire iOS userbase: "walk it off, suckers."

If piling engineers can solve problems, MS would not be still struggling in mobile space.

Anyway I would rather wait for google maps. Just like I use Dropbox instead of iCloud. Sometimes you should not waste resource on things you are not good at.

They should stick to making cool casings for tech that is two months ahead of what everybody else is working on.

The issue here seems to be that Apple have developed a reputation for producing polished "finished products" that doesn't gel particularly well with rolling out "perpetual beta" web services.

I assume their hands were tied here, and there was no way for them to roll out a "New Maps Beta" for interested/adventurous users while still bundling the Google-powered Maps app as the iOS default (the same way they rolled out Messages beta as an optional download for OS X users while still bundling iChat with the OS). Certainly, the fact that the new Maps isn't billed as a "beta" (as Siri still is) doesn't match the tone of Apple PR's message.

Much of this could have been solved with an overlap between the new and old Maps app. I'm not sure what the best way to do it would have been – make the new one an App Store app while renewing the contract with Google for another 12 months, kind of like the Messages beta on 10.7? It would be out of character for Apple to release a public beta of something for iOS, but not as out-of-character as what we've seen happen with the release of iOS 6.

I think you're right that Apple needed an overlap period, but I also think doing that would have been very difficult.

Google certainly wouldn't have been happy with a public beta of a replacement app. Meanwhile, Apple wouldn't have wanted Google to launch their own future app on the App Store in the interim. Could those have been the sticking points in their negotiations?

I realize that this seems to be a bit against the majority opinion, but I've had no problems with the new Maps. Yesterday I had it direct me on an 80 mile round-trip, and it sent me exactly how Google would have.

Since I also don't live in a good area for transit, Maps is an improvement for me. Obviously it isn't for other people, but it still feels weird watching all the fuss over it.

Your CV suggests you are based on the West Coast. One of the complaints appears to be that it works on the West Coast where Apple engineers live and work, less so elsewhere.

I do commend you on the amount of research that you engaged in for this comment. However, my CV is a little misleading; I work for deviantART, which is based in Loa Angeles, but I do so from Missouri. :)

What they really mean to say is the more people contribute to OpenStreetMaps, the better Apple Maps will get.

So whenever I contribute to OSM I am contributing to Apple Maps commercial product?

Apple Maps are not using OpenStreetMaps. So you contributing to Apple Maps has no bearing on contributing to OSM, same with other way around.

The article says Apple Maps is using OSM data. Is the article wrong? Or is there something they left out?

To what degree are they using it? Not a large one.

Looking at the maps for Japan on OSM and iOS 6, if they are using OSM data it must be a very small subset and they're adding a ton of crap over it.

For example: they usually have one label for a train/subway station which is well placed and then a second label for the same station 200m to the south-east. OSM has nothing like this. They must be cobbling many datasets together with no fact-checking...

In Germany, OSM maps are beautiful and extremely comprehensive. Apple maps are woefully incomplete and ugly as hell. If Apple is indeed using OSM data, they threw away half of it when creating their own maps.

I wonder if they are gathering GPS traces from everyone while the map app is open and doing with OpenStreetMap does and averaging the results to build better paths.

I'm also curious if Apple contributes back to OSM when they find mistakes.

Apple Maps only looks bad because barely anyone has used it. Try comparing Google Maps from launch day in 2005 to Google Maps from now.

Google Maps blew everyone the day it came out.

I think I would have remembered that.

And yet, apparently you didn't.

The day google maps came out was basically the last day I used mapquest.

I didn't remember it because it didn't happen (parse the original sentence a little more carefully :-)

Ooops.

This is basically true. Before Google maps, mapquest was the best thing out there and it wasn't even remotely as interactive or easy to use.

I'm pretty sure I switched the day it debuted.

Yes - I remember the exact moment I first saw google maps and their clever ajaxy magical behavior. The only time I recall being so astonished by technology was the first time I used an iPhone.

Google Maps was the iPhone of Mapping, and continues to be so. And, much the same way others are pretty good (Bing Maps isn't bad) - they are all still compared to Google Maps.

Apple Maps is the Zune? No, that's not a good comparison, the Zune was a competent technical product. The Kin? Maybe not that bad. Apple maps is the Kindle Fire (original) of Mapping. Starts off kind of crappy, but might turn into something better with a lot of work. People will still want an iPad though.

So you're saying in another 7 years and Apple maps should be good? I understand the strategic motivation for switching to something they can control, but it really is a big step back for iPhone users.

That's true (or may be true), but unfortunately nobody is comparing Google Maps circa 2005 to Google Maps today. They're comparing Google Maps today to Apple Maps today and finding the latter wanting.

The point isn't if Apple Maps will be good or not. The point is that Apple won't give us what we want and that is Google Maps.

There is a better product out there, and until yesterday I had easy access to it on my phone and now I don't (sorry I don't like loading up google maps in the browser).

If I had to bet, I'd say Apple won't approve Google Maps native app for a while just to force people into using their Maps hoping we'd get used to it.

That's not how things work. That's like saying "look at how crappy the Model-T ford is compared to a Civic". Time matters. Having a good product compared to the competition right now is what matters. If google tried to roll back to the 2005 version of google maps they would get creamed in the marketplace, and rightly so. There's no excuse for having an inferior product.

2 beers later and I realize this is a really bad comment. However, I still believe that despite the insane failure that Apple's Maps are, they will only get better with more user input.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com