Eric Schmidt: Google Hasn’t Submitted A Native Google Maps App To Apple (Yet) | Hacker News Reader

Eric Schmidt: Google Hasn’t Submitted A Native Google Maps App To Apple (Yet)

techcrunch.com

29 pointssteve_colton59 comments

"We think it would have been better if they had kept ours. But what do I know?" Schmidt told a small group of reporters in Tokyo. "What were we going to do, force them not to change their mind? It's their call."

Eric Schmidt a real gentleman always. Also this puts to bed the arguments from Apple cheerleaders suggesting that Google might be the one that removed Maps from iPhone.

Not that it's really relevant for us end-users, but this still says nothing. It only means that Apple didn't want to continue using Google Maps. It says nothing about what terms Google was suggesting for continued use. If Google demanded something totally unreasonable (like a patent agreement legitimizing Android, or 10 times the money Google was asking before), then Apple didn't really have a choice to leave - no matter how Eric Schmidt is wording this now.

In the end the only thing that matters is that we end-users lose greatly functionality-wise because two large companies behave like children. And us end users don't know better than finger-pointing and playing along (not that we have any choice in the matter anyways)

> two large companies behave like children

I only see one child (Apple) here.

Perhaps, but you really just have no idea what conversations are happening behind closed doors.

Google did something to cause Apple to do this, as well as Apple already reducing their use of Google, and it's all private. Childish things would include talking in public.

How do you know Google did anything?

They took it public with this statement, right?

Probably Apple had preferential access to API ( like free for 5 years ), Apple still wanted to have free access plus probably extended APIs (like directions, vector maps). But since Google is not providing Maps API for free anymore for high volume, they may have wanted Apple to pay like everybody else. Apple said no (too expensive, akin to microsoft tax on FAT LFN ), Google said sorry. End of story.

The only people I see acting like children here are Apple fanboys, Google fanboys, and tech blog writers. Not Apple themselves, nor Google, except where one of the three groups above starts putting words in their mouth.

Full disclosure: I am one of those three types of people above but that doesn't mean I agree with the actions of others in that group.

"something totally unreasonable (like a patent agreement legitimizing Android)"

Doesn't strike me as that unreasonable.

Nope. For us, that's perfectly legitimate. But it likely isn't for Apple who seem to follow the philosophy lately that any phone that's not an iPhone should be illegal.

And that would make a patent agreement entirely unreasonable for Apple

It's very easy to make assumptions that the reason Apple chose to roll their own was because Google hiked their prices, but where's the smoking gun?

There isn’t one, why should there be?

The point isn't that "Google hiked their prices," the point is that there are more than a few possibilities for legitimate Google-driven business reasons for the maps change instead of just assuming Apple hates their users and wants them to have crappy maps.

I think it's pretty clear from the quote that Google did not offer unreasonable terms.

How is it clear from the quote that Google did not offer unreasonable terms? Would you mind expanding a little?

this puts to bed the arguments from Apple cheerleaders suggesting that Google might be the one that removed Maps from iPhone

It really says nothing to imply that there were not terms attached to the use of Google's maps that a reasonable observer would not conclude were unreasonable for Apple to agree too. It says nothing to imply that there *weree either, but we still can't say either way.

> Eric Schmidt a real gentleman always.

Pretty sure a real gentleman wouldn't sit on the board of a company whilst at the same time building a competitor product.

I don't think a single statement is enough to define someone a gentleman or not, but anyway, he did resign from apple's board to avoid conflict of interest. Source: http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/03/googles-eric-schmidt-resi...

As far as I know, he refused to attend some meetings pertaining to iPhone and he eventually decided it would be best for him to resign.

Nonsense. For one, that word "gentleman" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. His PR people have briefed Schmidt on making Delphic pronouncements which mean all things to all people. Who knows what "keeping ours" involved, perhaps a long term contract, perhaps a vastly increased fee?

We still don't know what concessions Google was trying to force from Apple over the negotiations. He's probably right, Apple did make the call, but we still don't know whether it was a case of Apple being a child or Google trying to extort them.

It's very possible that Google went in to the negotiations hostile.

Spoken like a true CEO. Everyone reading into this "it must be Apple's fault because Google said they're innocent", congratulations, you've been trolled by corporate politics.

Of course Google thinks it would have been better if Apple kept their maps, they lost license revenue and a bunch of all-important user metrics with the change.

The above statement is in no way absolution of Google's involvement in the decision. It's just a tactful response to a situation where fanboys on both sides of the fence are going to go apoplectic over anything more specific.

The second sentence after that quote could just have easily been "It's their call, all we were doing is asking for 10x licensing fees and a blanket agreement to stop suing Android handset makers for patent infringement, which I think is perfectly reasonable. They got all mad at us and said they'd do their own maps instead. They're totally at fault here."

Is he still CEO?

Let's not be ridiculous here. Maps isn't run for Android, it's run for Google. In fact, in terms of hierarchy, they're pretty much on the same level. Google hasn't submitted a maps app because a/ it needs to build the demand for it and b/ it's not ready yet. People way overstate the importance of Android to Google.

Google needs Android, to make sure Maps and other Google products are on phones and tablets. If Android didn't exist, and Apple stopped using Google products - and Microsoft use Bing - then Google would be in trouble.

What do you think if worth more to Google? Being on every platform or only having their own platform? Why do you think Android is so popular now? Or how Microsoft was able to ride the IBM clones to dominance? You guys think too small.

Being on every platform is better than just their own. But being on no platform is even worse.

Without Android, Google may have ended up on no platform.

I think the reason why you are annoyed with my comment is perhaps you think I'm saying Google shouldn't release maps for iOS? I think they should, and will. I'm just disagreeing with you when you say that Android isn't that important.

I wouldn't say annoyed, most disappointed. Google have never thought of Android as anything other than another avenue to peddle their services. They're on record stating as such, it's not the other way round. Google were making Maps for BlackBerry and I'm sure other services will follow. In fact, I'd be mighty surprised that should WP8 get a decent market share, you won't see the full GApps package for that. You can't run your products as a shared entity that epitomises the business. You run your products independently with the best interests of the business at heart. Going back to the Samsung example, the exact reason why Samsung can owe Apple a billion and yet still be making them chips.

As a side note - have you noticed that articles about Maps keep disappearing off the front page? I think they are being removed by the mods.

Not surprised really. The front page is being flooded with rehashes of the same story.

Good to see the mods are being effective and efficient. How many more "lol, maps!" articles do you need to see?

No. You clearly underestimate the importance of Android.

More and more people are exclusively using their mobile for the internet which will explode once smartphones take hold in India/Africa/China.

Given that Nokia/Microsoft doesn't use any Google products and it's questionable how long Google Search will exist on the iPhone they NEED Android. Desperately.

Do you think Google is close to eradicating the iPhone? Do you think Google is close to eradicating the iPad or even the iPod? Google Maps is one department and Google Android a total other. Whether Android is a success or dies tomorrow, Maps will still be around and driving ad sales. In case you forgot, Google is an advertising company, not an Operating System company.

That doesn't address the central part of taligent's comment. Yes, Google is an advertising company but they fear a future where their products (and therefore their adverts) are frozen out of smartphones. If Android didn't exist and the iPhone was the only game in town then perhaps that is exactly what would have just happened to Google Maps.

Frozen out by who? Being one of the most popular apps in the app store is far more valuable to Google than being preloaded on devices. Why? Because it enables word of mouth and discoverability.

If Android didn't exist, Google maps would be an external app on Blackberry as it is and other OSs.

This Bloomberg report says that he actually didn't comment on whether or not a Maps app had been submitted:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-25/google-s-schmidt-sa...

The Verge also notes that Reuters has softened the tone of their original report:

http://theverge.com/2012/9/25/3386598/google-maps-app-store-...

Why would Google help Apple out? Lack of decent iOS maps doesn't disadvantage Google or Android in any way.

Because Google actually wants iOS users to use Google Maps.

Really? I'd have thought Google wants iOS users to use Android.

Haha!

No. Well, yes. But it’s more complicated. Google wants eyeballs, so ignoring a big platform like iOS completely is not really an option. I don’t think you understand the business Google is in.

I don't think you understand where Google business is going. See, even with 60% of market share with Android, Google still makes less money in a whole year with Android ads than Samsung does in a quarter. Mobile ads just don't pay that much. It's clear to Google that even if they get 80% of market share (which is very unlikely), they'll still make less money on mobile ads in a year than Samsung does in a quarter by selling phones, not to mention Apple.

I think Google is going to go full on with Motorola and start selling their own phones. If they can manage to grab 10 or 20% of market share, they'll make way more money than with mobile ads now. And with HTC and Samsung eyeing on Windows8, Google may be forced to ship its own phones anyway. That's just my opinion obviously but it's easy to see they're taking Motorola very seriously (and is not just a patent deal) given that they put one of their best guy in charge.

No, they clearly won’t. They know what they can and cannot do.

And how do you know that? We'll see how it turns out but at this point you can't predict they won't.

Why do you think Google even has Maps ? Advertising.

iOS users greatly outnumber Android in mobile internet use hence it would be stupid of Google to leave money on the table and not build an app.

> iOS users greatly outnumber Android in mobile internet

Source? I hate to be the one to ask for sources, but this sounds completely wrong.

http://www.netmarketshare.com

Mobile browser share

    Safari:  66.2%
    Android: 19.4%

Mobile OS Share:

    iOS:     65.7%
    Android: 20.2%

http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-ww-monthly-201108-20120...

Android: 28% iOS: 24%

It's easy to find web brpwser stats that validate your opinion.

I'd guess embarrassing Apple counts for more than advertising revenue at the moment. Also a Google maps app with adverts is going to make the (inevitable) improved ad-free Apple maps app look better and better.

In some locales, sure, but not in general.

Worldwide: Android beats iOS slightly. http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-ww-monthly-201108-20120...

Europe: iOS beats Android slightly. http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-eu-monthly-201108-20120...

North America: iOS beats Android by 10% http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-na-monthly-201108-20120...

South America: Android beats iOS by 28% http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-sa-monthly-201108-20120...

Asia: Android beats iOS by 10% http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-as-monthly-201108-20120...

Do many of the major sites actually use StatCounter though?

Akamai's stats show a very different story - http://blog.cloudfour.com/explaining-the-ios-and-android-mob...

Other stats from Akamai show yet another story http://www.akamai.com/html/io/io_dataset.html#stat=mobile_br... The usage is similar, but (my guess) Android users prefer to use a notebook at home rather than a cellphone

most android people i know use a third party browser that pretends to be a desktop browser to avoid those crappy mobile sites.

> "most of the Web sites sampled for the Akamai IO Beta are focused on a U.S. audience."

Also if you aren't a "major site" how much do you care that most their mobile users are on iOS? Maybe that means you should be pushing Android compatibility even harder if Android users are more willing to try out smaller brands?

The lesson here is not that iOS rules and Android drools or any other nonsense. It's that you should know your market.

At least this puts to bed the conspiracy theories that Apple is blocking the GMaps app.

iOS apps are sandboxed. Maps app used to be fairly integrated with the native OS when it comes to opening an address in a webpage or email. If Google is to submit a independent app, some of those features will probably be loss unless Apple makes an exception for Google.

This is a platform limitation: however, Apple also dropped the ball a little on this one and if Google had launched a native maps app on day one of iOS 6 they could have had quite a well integrated experience.

Previously, the standard way to open the maps app from within another app on iOS 6 was to call a 'https://maps.google.com URL. Rather than re-directing to Safari, iOS would pick this up and forward the user to the Maps app instead[1].

For obvious reasons, Apple changed this in iOS 6. Trying to open a maps.google.com URL now opens Safari. This means the overwhelming majority of apps that used to hot-link directly to the maps app now boot users off to the Google Maps website (since most apps have not been updated yet to support all iOS 6 features). It would be very straightforward for Google to adapt this to forward users back to their own app.

[1]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30058/how-can-i-launch-th...

couldn't you link to the AP article instead of TC's?

You mean this Reuters article? http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/us-google-iphone-i...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com