5 ms·

Apple's solution isn't a serious contender because it's hardware locked to high end devices that the majority of people don't use / can't afford (the demographi

Apple's solution isn't a serious contender because it's hardware locked to high end devices that the majority of people don't use / can't afford (the demographics of this community not withstanding). While it's nice that their users can have an alternate first-party experience, that experience is not a publically available map. For example if you go to maps.apple.com you are told "Open this on your Apple Hardware". (i.e. If 100% of Apple users used Apple Maps, Apple's best case scenario is still #2 in mapping)

ChuckMcM 4y ago
One could argue that "most" people[1] have iPhones (at least in the US). And yes it is only 22% world wide. But putting aside the currently available "seats" for a moment, at the point where is it clearly the better product then two things start happening 1) People start buying Apple hardware because it has a better map experience. 2) Apple can produce the iMap device, likely in cooperation with their maps partner TomTom, that people can use to get the Apple Maps experience without changing their phone provider. [1] https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/us-smartphone-market-share https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/us-smartphone-market-share
- mangoleaf 4y ago
  I live USA, Stanford engineer, have an Android phone and will likely never have an iPhone. My other gender breeding partner has to have an apple, so I use hers at times and am appalled at how difficult things are. But if she can't facetime friends, then she will lose face. I get free phones, and see pays large fees for hers. Sorry, I pass. I work in finance BTW.
  - ChuckMcM 4y ago
    I think that is great. FWIW I worked at Google and still have the original Dream phone in a box somewhere. And while I used iPads since the Android tablet experience never really congealed for me, used an Android phone until the iPhone 13 SE I currently own. I am also a firm believer that everyone should "vote with their wallet" for the products they want, so no judgement, on my part, on folks who buy one product or the other. In my experience I find that for every product I buy, the various choices all come with pluses and minuses. I go through that list and apply my own importance rating on each one and come up with my final choice. My original comment was that Apple Maps are getting better, they were at one time a complete joke. I use maps on my phone all the time, it is probably the largest use of mine after "looking things up on the web" or "communicating" via text or voice. As a result of this improvement in maps, it made this particular choice (for me) a better choice on the iPhone than on an android phone. I can tell that some people heard my comment above "if you don't own an iPhone you are stupid" or something like that. It certainly wasn't my intent. Never easy to know how something you say will be heard. My other experience is that products that get "better" overall, supplant, then replace what existed before them. Whether it is TVs, cars, computers, or phones. I still have a Garmin Navigator in my car's glove box but I don't think I have used it in nearly a decade. And yet there was a time when devices of that form were 90+% of the market for "in vehicle navigation."
- freedomben 4y ago
  While 55% is technically "most", there are hundreds of millions of people in that minority block. Definitely not a number to just dismiss from a function as important as mapping. As a member of that minority, I'm very grateful for non-hardware-locked mapping apps.
  - ChuckMcM 4y ago
    I 100% agree. What I was trying to communicate was that maps is a "feature" of a bigger platform "phone" and can be a discriminator for consumers on purchase. For example a consumer who uses their phone mostly for its maps and driving directions may choose a phone based on their best "maps" experience. The reference article was discussing a resurgence in "paper" maps, which have three advantages over "electronic" maps that I am aware of; they work when you are "offline", they have specific details of interest, and they "look good." My observation was that Apple appears to be investing in a better "map" experience on their phones. This resurgence might influence that investment. Dismissing that observation based on market share is probably unwise. Why? Because market share is a function of serving customer requirements better than the competition. Market share is a reflection of meeting requirements, and in the absence of external forces will result in the brands with doing the best job of meeting requirements ahead of their competitors.
    - criley2 4y ago
      If marketshare is a reflection of meeting customer requirements, then the fact that Google Maps is indisputably #1 and what 10X larger than Apple Maps means that consumers have decided which solution meets their needs the best, right? For the record, the best data available suggests that only ~50% of iOS users choose the pre-installed built-in Maps versus explicitly downloading the Google Maps app. One wonders what that number would look like without anti-competitive monopolistic bundling, too. From that perspective, it seems that the "majority of iOS users" would choose Google over Apple Maps, but Apple's anti-competitive behavior has kept it at around 50/50 on their own platform.
      - ChuckMcM 4y ago
tannhaeuser 4y ago
Apple isn't a serious contender because their devices aren't sponsored by tracking/ads? You can also get an iOS device (partly) included with a post-paid mobile plan, can't you?
- lmm 4y ago
  > Apple isn't a serious contender because their devices aren't sponsored by tracking/ads? Apple isn't a serious contender because they don't sell anything in the low-end segment. Ferrari make great cars but you can't expect everyone to drive a Ferrari. > You can also get an iOS device (partly) included with a post-paid mobile plan, can't you? That acts as a payment plan, but you're still paying the full cost (usually plus interest) one way or another.
  - sombragris 4y ago
    About your second response (which is quite right), let me add that in my neck of the woods (and in many others), there's no way to get an iOS device with any postpaid plan, or any other cell phone plan, for that matter.
  - GeekyBear 4y ago
    A $399 iPhone SE that has gotten seven years of OS updates and is still getting security updates today is as cost effective as several bargain bin devices that have to be quickly replaced.
    - lmm 4y ago
      Maybe. If you have the $399 upfront or the credit rating to get it on a phone contract. If you have anything to spend on buying a phone at all as opposed to having to use whatever hand-me-down device found its way to you.
      - GeekyBear 4y ago
        > as opposed to having to use whatever hand-me-down device found its way to you Given that Apple just issued another security update for the decade old iPhone 5s, your ability to hand down an iPhone is greatly extended, especially compared to the support policy you get with a bottom of the barrel Android device.

ChuckMcM 4y ago

One could argue that "most" people[1] have iPhones (at least in the US). And yes it is only 22% world wide. But putting aside the currently available "seats" for a moment, at the point where is it clearly the better product then two things start happening 1) People start buying Apple hardware because it has a better map experience. 2) Apple can produce the iMap device, likely in cooperation with their maps partner TomTom, that people can use to get the Apple Maps experience without changing their phone provider. [1] https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/us-smartphone-market-share https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/us-smartphone-market-share

mangoleaf 4y ago
I live USA, Stanford engineer, have an Android phone and will likely never have an iPhone. My other gender breeding partner has to have an apple, so I use hers at times and am appalled at how difficult things are. But if she can't facetime friends, then she will lose face. I get free phones, and see pays large fees for hers. Sorry, I pass. I work in finance BTW.
- ChuckMcM 4y ago
  I think that is great. FWIW I worked at Google and still have the original Dream phone in a box somewhere. And while I used iPads since the Android tablet experience never really congealed for me, used an Android phone until the iPhone 13 SE I currently own. I am also a firm believer that everyone should "vote with their wallet" for the products they want, so no judgement, on my part, on folks who buy one product or the other. In my experience I find that for every product I buy, the various choices all come with pluses and minuses. I go through that list and apply my own importance rating on each one and come up with my final choice. My original comment was that Apple Maps are getting better, they were at one time a complete joke. I use maps on my phone all the time, it is probably the largest use of mine after "looking things up on the web" or "communicating" via text or voice. As a result of this improvement in maps, it made this particular choice (for me) a better choice on the iPhone than on an android phone. I can tell that some people heard my comment above "if you don't own an iPhone you are stupid" or something like that. It certainly wasn't my intent. Never easy to know how something you say will be heard. My other experience is that products that get "better" overall, supplant, then replace what existed before them. Whether it is TVs, cars, computers, or phones. I still have a Garmin Navigator in my car's glove box but I don't think I have used it in nearly a decade. And yet there was a time when devices of that form were 90+% of the market for "in vehicle navigation."
freedomben 4y ago
While 55% is technically "most", there are hundreds of millions of people in that minority block. Definitely not a number to just dismiss from a function as important as mapping. As a member of that minority, I'm very grateful for non-hardware-locked mapping apps.
- ChuckMcM 4y ago
  I 100% agree. What I was trying to communicate was that maps is a "feature" of a bigger platform "phone" and can be a discriminator for consumers on purchase. For example a consumer who uses their phone mostly for its maps and driving directions may choose a phone based on their best "maps" experience. The reference article was discussing a resurgence in "paper" maps, which have three advantages over "electronic" maps that I am aware of; they work when you are "offline", they have specific details of interest, and they "look good." My observation was that Apple appears to be investing in a better "map" experience on their phones. This resurgence might influence that investment. Dismissing that observation based on market share is probably unwise. Why? Because market share is a function of serving customer requirements better than the competition. Market share is a reflection of meeting requirements, and in the absence of external forces will result in the brands with doing the best job of meeting requirements ahead of their competitors.
  - criley2 4y ago
    If marketshare is a reflection of meeting customer requirements, then the fact that Google Maps is indisputably #1 and what 10X larger than Apple Maps means that consumers have decided which solution meets their needs the best, right? For the record, the best data available suggests that only ~50% of iOS users choose the pre-installed built-in Maps versus explicitly downloading the Google Maps app. One wonders what that number would look like without anti-competitive monopolistic bundling, too. From that perspective, it seems that the "majority of iOS users" would choose Google over Apple Maps, but Apple's anti-competitive behavior has kept it at around 50/50 on their own platform.
    - ChuckMcM 4y ago

tannhaeuser 4y ago

Apple isn't a serious contender because their devices aren't sponsored by tracking/ads? You can also get an iOS device (partly) included with a post-paid mobile plan, can't you?

lmm 4y ago
> Apple isn't a serious contender because their devices aren't sponsored by tracking/ads? Apple isn't a serious contender because they don't sell anything in the low-end segment. Ferrari make great cars but you can't expect everyone to drive a Ferrari. > You can also get an iOS device (partly) included with a post-paid mobile plan, can't you? That acts as a payment plan, but you're still paying the full cost (usually plus interest) one way or another.
- sombragris 4y ago
  About your second response (which is quite right), let me add that in my neck of the woods (and in many others), there's no way to get an iOS device with any postpaid plan, or any other cell phone plan, for that matter.
- GeekyBear 4y ago
  A $399 iPhone SE that has gotten seven years of OS updates and is still getting security updates today is as cost effective as several bargain bin devices that have to be quickly replaced.
  - lmm 4y ago
    Maybe. If you have the $399 upfront or the credit rating to get it on a phone contract. If you have anything to spend on buying a phone at all as opposed to having to use whatever hand-me-down device found its way to you.
    - GeekyBear 4y ago
      > as opposed to having to use whatever hand-me-down device found its way to you Given that Apple just issued another security update for the decade old iPhone 5s, your ability to hand down an iPhone is greatly extended, especially compared to the support policy you get with a bottom of the barrel Android device.