Hacker News Reader

Comment by demallien | Hacker News Reader

Just as a data point on this whole Maps thing, Apple Maps in iOS 6 has already saved me on numerous occassions in the US and Europe. In Europe, I had a dedicated Garmin Nuvi, but it was Maps that got me to the the tiny village in Alsace. In the US I had a dedicated TomTom, but it was Maps that was able to correctly locate sites of interest for Civil War fans (Eastern Theater). Both dedicated GPSes had had their maps updated in the last month or so.

Make of that what you will, but my personal experience has been that Maps is actually pretty reasonable. In major cities it maybe isn't quite as detailed as Google maps, but then, you can always use Google Maps as a web app for that...

View on HN

In general, a map will always be good enough until the moment they aren't. It's extremely localized, and your experience can't be compared to another persons' 1-1.

There are now entire countries with completely useless maps. Is that fair to iPhone users in those countries? Even in Canada and the USA, thousands of small cities that formerly had detailed maps were "wiped off the map" with this update. So while millions of people think things have gotten better, millions of people can also legitimately claim Maps is not just "worse" but completely broken.

For the people who live in cities with turn-by-turn navigation and 3D flyovers, hey the new Maps is great. Apple has sacrificed a product that was good enough for most people with one that is great for some and terrible for others. It's a tough decision for them to make, and they should have still used Google Maps app for those who are affected negatively since theres still so much time left on the contract with Google.

> It's a tough decision for them to make, and they should have still used Google Maps app for those who are affected negatively since theres still so much time left on the contract with Google.

If they had given themselves a year where they made Maps available incrementally "by region" then they could have given themselves more time to test and refine the data and enticed users waiting in expectation instead of disappointing a whole bunch of them en-masse. Everyone outside the SF Bay Area could have looked on in expectation while us poor saps would look forward to the day.

"...where they made Maps available incrementally "by region"

I can see where you're coming from but I don't know if isolating map availability by region would work. Hyper-local travel is used in the majority of cases, but there are cases of regional travel too. What happens if someone wants turn-by-turn navigation from California to, say, Oregon, to attend a conference, weekend getaway, job interview, or just simply meet at a coffee shop in the new region? I live in Seattle, and often drive to Vancouver BC or Portland for weekends, just as an example.

IMHO, the real mistake here was setting expectations so that it would be lower and not affixing the "Beta" label to it (as was done to Siri.) Apple should also have, side from collecting data logs, ensured there's a more prominent feedback loop. As to your suggestion, I think a broader approach would work better, and perhaps work in layers of information, drilling down more deeply with richer details in regional pockets, one broad layer at a time.

> I can see where you're coming from but I don't know if isolating map availability by region would work. Hyper-local travel is used in the majority of cases, but there are cases of regional travel too.

No duh. It wouldn't "work" in the sense of excluding absolutely 100% of people. So what? From Apple's perspective, it would be fine if it worked just 85 to 90% of the time. The point is to avoid a massive amount of customer dissatisfaction.

> IMHO, the real mistake here was setting expectations so that it would be lower and not affixing the "Beta" label to it (as was done to Siri.)

No disagreement there. Doing both things would have been even better.

> I had a dedicated Garmin Nuvi, but it was Maps that got me to the tiny village in Alsace.

Huh? What kind of village in Alsace is not referenced on your Garmin Nuvi (or any kind of maps)? For example, all villages have a wikipedia page!

Thank you for the data point. I think I'll still (admittedly a bit irrationally) wait for 6.1 to be released, and I'll probably update at that point.

I've little reason so switch yet anyway.

You realize that a dot-release likely won't update Maps a whole ton right? The application itself that's installed on the phone is fine. It's the data that some people find to be inaccurate or not detailed. Apple has been updating the data independently of OS releases, AFAIK.

Of course, but I think it'll iron other potential issues and will likely be released at a point where Apple feels they have improved a map enough to say "here look new version, more shiny, maps no sucky anymore". The iOS 6.1 point I don't see as something which will improve map, but as something which will mark maps as improved.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com