3 ms·

It feels a bit silly to fawn over map tiles... and I'll probably be accused of being an "Apple Fanboy"... But I'll be damned if those aren't some gorgeous tiles

It feels a bit silly to fawn over map tiles... and I'll probably be accused of being an "Apple Fanboy"... But I'll be damned if those aren't some gorgeous tiles. Hopefully, this signals apple will move away from google for the built in maps app and provide something superior themselves with something comparable to the kick ass turn by turn in the current Android devices.

randallsquared 15y ago
One of these is far nicer and clearer than the other: http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image3.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image3.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image4.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image4.png Apple's version comes up really lacking in comparison to the default OSM one, which I would call gorgeous, personally.
- dochtman 15y ago
  Meh. I love what OSM is doing, but IMO their tile style doesn't hold a candle to Google's (but then I dislike Apple's style here, as well).
  - lbotos 15y ago
    Anyone can make their own tiles with things like tilemill (http://mapbox.com/tilemill/ http://mapbox.com/tilemill/)
- tseabrooks 15y ago
  I find the OSM one to be way way to busy. I think the Google tiles provide better information clarity + attractiveness value. However, I still maintain those new apple tiles are gorgeous, the way an antique map is gorgeous. I never claimed it provided more information; It's clearly providing less information. But aesthetics and function are separate vectors.
- RandallBrown 15y ago
  OSM is trying to give you directions, Apple is trying to show you the general area of where a photo was taken. I like that Apple is throwing away some of the information to make it look a little nicer. In a map app though, this would be stupid.
  - ajross 15y ago
    I think your broad point is valid (brevity and concision are virtues). But in this specific situation your way off, sorry. That photo was taken in a park. In one of those maps that fact is abundantly clear. In the other it's not. Hell, in the apple map the trails look like roads. How on earth could anyone call that "clear"?

randallsquared 15y ago

One of these is far nicer and clearer than the other: http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image3.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image3.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image4.png http://alastaira.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/image4.png Apple's version comes up really lacking in comparison to the default OSM one, which I would call gorgeous, personally.

dochtman 15y ago
Meh. I love what OSM is doing, but IMO their tile style doesn't hold a candle to Google's (but then I dislike Apple's style here, as well).
- lbotos 15y ago
  Anyone can make their own tiles with things like tilemill (http://mapbox.com/tilemill/ http://mapbox.com/tilemill/)
tseabrooks 15y ago
I find the OSM one to be way way to busy. I think the Google tiles provide better information clarity + attractiveness value. However, I still maintain those new apple tiles are gorgeous, the way an antique map is gorgeous. I never claimed it provided more information; It's clearly providing less information. But aesthetics and function are separate vectors.
RandallBrown 15y ago
OSM is trying to give you directions, Apple is trying to show you the general area of where a photo was taken. I like that Apple is throwing away some of the information to make it look a little nicer. In a map app though, this would be stupid.
- ajross 15y ago
  I think your broad point is valid (brevity and concision are virtues). But in this specific situation your way off, sorry. That photo was taken in a park. In one of those maps that fact is abundantly clear. In the other it's not. Hell, in the apple map the trails look like roads. How on earth could anyone call that "clear"?