7 ms·

I look at this and can't believe Apple wanted to ship with this. And I mean that literally, not incredulously. I believe Apple wants to be in carol of its mappi

I look at this and can't believe Apple wanted to ship with this. And I mean that literally, not incredulously. I believe Apple wants to be in carol of its mapping future, but this product isn't ready yet, and I don't think Apple is so delusional to not be able to see that. So that makes me wonder what happened in contract negotiations with Google to force it out. Did Google flat-out say "No"? Seems unlikely. Was it just too expensive? That's possible, especially if these negotiations happened during the time Google massively raised the prices on its API (completely random speculation: maybe the price increase was only about Apple), so Apple had to invest elsewhere. Did Google just want control of their map data or want to give Android a massive competitive edge so they backed out? That seems unlikely, but may be answered if Google doesn't put out a map app for iOS.

buro9 14y ago
Adverts. Spatial adverts are a big thing now, with a big future. I would speculate that beyond the cost of licensing the maps or the contractual stuff is that Apple did not want to deliver to Google more advertisers that would further entrench Google Maps as the dominant player. Apple need to be able to build their own POI database and knowledge of where all advertiser businesses are in order to get that revenue long-term. Thus, Apple need control of the maps to control the method that advertisers get onto the map. I think it's just strategic rather than contractual or short-term financial.
- rictic 14y ago
  I'm not sure whether you're saying that there weren't google ads in the old iOS maps, but I'm fairly sure I saw an ad there when I did a search for Pizza Hut a week ago in SF.
  - tharris0101 14y ago
    There were. I think they called them "Sponsored" or something. It really annoyed me because if I'd search for something common like "Home Depot" it would give me random pins at places that were definitely not Home Depot but rather sponsored businesses.
- taligent 14y ago
  None of this is true. Google doesn't own their own POI database they license it from others and to date Apple hasn't approached these companies. So it isn't about the POI database. It's more about the fact that Google was withholding data for Turn by Turn and 3D.
  - fpgeek 14y ago
    Zagat and Frommer's aren't comprehensive, but surely they're at least important POI databases?
jblock 14y ago
I couldn't care less about what Apple was thinking before they released this. What matters is that they pushed out a living, breathing UX fuck-up of an application to millions of people that depended on it to get around.
- jws 14y ago
  And if each iPhone user reports one problem, the entire POI problem will be solved. I didn't calculate that, but I'm fairly certain it works. The only reason Google knew where my businesses were was because I told them. They kept that information walled up, so I guess I need to tell apple too now that there are millions of people seeing that database. I haven't found where to add a POI, it may not be there, but marking wrong ones is easy. Edit: Found it. Adding a location is under the "report a problem" under the curl up corner. Don't start with a new pin.
  - abbotao 14y ago
    If you touch the corner to reveal the map options, "Report a Problem" is next to "Data from TomTom and others." You can report incorrect search results, incorrect street labels, missing location (POI) or problems with directions.
  - jarek 14y ago
    > And if each iPhone user reports one problem, the entire POI problem will be solved. When each iPhone user reports one problem, and staff at Apple take a look at them all, determine whether each report is correct, and act on it, the entire POI problem will be solved.
ChuckMcM 14y ago
You are probably correct. However if you look at Google's moves in the maps API with respect to charging money the simplest explanation is that Apple and Google could not come to terms on the price for access and so Apple went with 'plan B'. Given the pain Apple is causing Google in its patent assault I don't doubt for a minute that the senior management at Google would have any regrets about 'losing' the Apple map business vs 'gaining' a poorly executed maps product on their premier devices. I also don't expect Apple to approve any Google "maps" application any time soon either given how strategic it is for their mobile business. My best guess is that Apple did the math and said "Well its going to suck rocks but we have to dominate this space, this moves our time table up but doesn't change what we need to do, ship what you have and put your best team on making it excellent." EDIT: Reminds me of Intel's response to AMD's multi-core where Intel literally glued two separate CPU chips into the same package and shipped it as a 'multi-core' CPU. That sucked too but they had an answer in the market, and they invested in making that answer competitive over the next 3 years to get a more real multi-core out the door. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_D http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_D
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  Apple doesn't have a history of dominating any free-to-use services so I'm doubtful that they'll invest beyond the "good enough" threshold. This feels like ReadingList to me.
  - ChuckMcM 14y ago
    We'll see [1]. Some people miss the critical bit about maps on phones. Ask yourself, "How can Google make sooo much money on search advertising?" I mean seriously, rounded to the nearest billion they don't have any other businesses. The insight that explains it is that search advertising exploits the fact that the consumer is "looking" and they have what they are looking for "the query". When that signals a possible purchase intent "car safety reviews" for example, at that instant in time Google gives advertisers a way to put their message in front of the consumer's eyeballs when they are most receptive to that message. The effectiveness of a car dealership advertisement in a Harry Potter movie preview? Lots of eyeballs, few if any looking for a car. In a search query on cars? Lots of eyeballs, many if not most of which are looking for a car. This is what makes search advertising an insanely better advertising vehicle then pretty much any other form of advertisement. Now lets look at maps on mobile devices. This has the same fundamental super power as search advertising, mobile maps are a search api. Many people don't put that together but when you are using your mobile device's maps you are seeking out directions, what you are looking for signals intent, and on that intent one can build a very profitable advertising platform. If I pull out my iPad and click 'coffee shops' on the maps search box I have signaled both where I am, and that I'm looking for a coffee shop. As a shop owner how much would you pay to have that person go to your shop? $0.50? $1? $2? How do you know your ad worked? Well there is an NFC payment, or a coupon you can offer up on the mobile device, or your local WiFi hotspot (remember that?) can tell you that the wifi mac address of the device that did the maps search, just walked into range of your hotspot. Do you see it yet? Mobile Maps is as big a business as Google's search advertising business and its still un-plundered. Apple will do everything they can to 'dominate' this particular 'free to use' service. [1] Best scene ever in "Charlie's War"
obeattie 14y ago
> Was it just too expensive? That's possible, especially if these negotiations happened during the time Google massively raised the prices on its API I think the figure was that Apple had $117bn or so IN CASH at the end of Q2. Whatever it was, money cannot have been the issue here. (Also, consider the cost of developing the new Maps.app in-house. Huge.)
- therandomguy 14y ago
  If I had $500 in my pocket I would still not pay $20 for a latte.
  - snogglethorpe 14y ago
    > If I had $500 in my pocket I would still not pay $20 for a latte. ... but the alternative here is alienating half their users. They don't have to pay Google forever, they just have to pay them until they actually get their own mapping infrastructure into a usable state. Nobody likes paying too much, but sometimes the alternative is far worse, and you're much better off just swallowing your pride and doing it.
rhizome 14y ago
Release early, release often. Luckily Apple themselves don't have any delays getting revisions into their app store.
- WiseWeasel 14y ago
  The only issue is that since Maps is a default app, not managed by the App Store, Apple has to push OS updates to update it in any way, which is somewhat of a barrier to adoption.
  - outworlder 14y ago
    And yet that shouldn't be a problem if the issue lies in the server's data.
  - microtherion 14y ago
    But the problems reported are all data problems, which presumably can be fixed in the cloud. No app update needed at all.
    - WiseWeasel 14y ago
      Yeah, not only that, but you can apparently register your iOS app as a routing app for Maps, and its content will be integrated into the Maps app for users who install it. http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/20/embark_garmin_add_public_transit_support_for_apples_ios_6_maps http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/20/embark_garmin_add_...
psychotik 14y ago
That makes sense, but you miss one point - Google isn't the only game in town. Why not contract with Bing, which has it's own mapping app on iOS and use that for iOS 6 (either permanently, or as a stop gap while you perfect your own mapping software). I would be surprised if Microsoft would reject that offer, given that it would help them get more search share and mindshare. I wonder if they tried this at all.
nikcub 14y ago
> what happened in contract negotiations with Google to force it out. This is almost certainly Apple being pissed off about Android and continuing to untie themselves from Google. It just isn't working out as well as they had planned. Google give Maps for free to other providers as well, as long as you bundle search/gmail with it. Apple decided to pick out and replace the only part that Google don't make money on in iOS, the part that had the most technical risk and the part that Android completely kick their ass on. Google right now are asking why they should bother going to the trouble of producing a no-revenue Maps app for iOS when so many users suddenly discovered a greater appreciation for Android today. Apple completely screwed up here. In more ways than one - and it was all because of a grudge.

buro9 14y ago

Adverts. Spatial adverts are a big thing now, with a big future. I would speculate that beyond the cost of licensing the maps or the contractual stuff is that Apple did not want to deliver to Google more advertisers that would further entrench Google Maps as the dominant player. Apple need to be able to build their own POI database and knowledge of where all advertiser businesses are in order to get that revenue long-term. Thus, Apple need control of the maps to control the method that advertisers get onto the map. I think it's just strategic rather than contractual or short-term financial.

rictic 14y ago
I'm not sure whether you're saying that there weren't google ads in the old iOS maps, but I'm fairly sure I saw an ad there when I did a search for Pizza Hut a week ago in SF.
- tharris0101 14y ago
  There were. I think they called them "Sponsored" or something. It really annoyed me because if I'd search for something common like "Home Depot" it would give me random pins at places that were definitely not Home Depot but rather sponsored businesses.
taligent 14y ago
None of this is true. Google doesn't own their own POI database they license it from others and to date Apple hasn't approached these companies. So it isn't about the POI database. It's more about the fact that Google was withholding data for Turn by Turn and 3D.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  Zagat and Frommer's aren't comprehensive, but surely they're at least important POI databases?

jblock 14y ago

I couldn't care less about what Apple was thinking before they released this. What matters is that they pushed out a living, breathing UX fuck-up of an application to millions of people that depended on it to get around.

jws 14y ago
And if each iPhone user reports one problem, the entire POI problem will be solved. I didn't calculate that, but I'm fairly certain it works. The only reason Google knew where my businesses were was because I told them. They kept that information walled up, so I guess I need to tell apple too now that there are millions of people seeing that database. I haven't found where to add a POI, it may not be there, but marking wrong ones is easy. Edit: Found it. Adding a location is under the "report a problem" under the curl up corner. Don't start with a new pin.
- abbotao 14y ago
  If you touch the corner to reveal the map options, "Report a Problem" is next to "Data from TomTom and others." You can report incorrect search results, incorrect street labels, missing location (POI) or problems with directions.
- jarek 14y ago
  > And if each iPhone user reports one problem, the entire POI problem will be solved. When each iPhone user reports one problem, and staff at Apple take a look at them all, determine whether each report is correct, and act on it, the entire POI problem will be solved.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

You are probably correct. However if you look at Google's moves in the maps API with respect to charging money the simplest explanation is that Apple and Google could not come to terms on the price for access and so Apple went with 'plan B'. Given the pain Apple is causing Google in its patent assault I don't doubt for a minute that the senior management at Google would have any regrets about 'losing' the Apple map business vs 'gaining' a poorly executed maps product on their premier devices. I also don't expect Apple to approve any Google "maps" application any time soon either given how strategic it is for their mobile business. My best guess is that Apple did the math and said "Well its going to suck rocks but we have to dominate this space, this moves our time table up but doesn't change what we need to do, ship what you have and put your best team on making it excellent." EDIT: Reminds me of Intel's response to AMD's multi-core where Intel literally glued two separate CPU chips into the same package and shipped it as a 'multi-core' CPU. That sucked too but they had an answer in the market, and they invested in making that answer competitive over the next 3 years to get a more real multi-core out the door. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_D http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_D

MatthewPhillips 14y ago
Apple doesn't have a history of dominating any free-to-use services so I'm doubtful that they'll invest beyond the "good enough" threshold. This feels like ReadingList to me.
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  We'll see [1]. Some people miss the critical bit about maps on phones. Ask yourself, "How can Google make sooo much money on search advertising?" I mean seriously, rounded to the nearest billion they don't have any other businesses. The insight that explains it is that search advertising exploits the fact that the consumer is "looking" and they have what they are looking for "the query". When that signals a possible purchase intent "car safety reviews" for example, at that instant in time Google gives advertisers a way to put their message in front of the consumer's eyeballs when they are most receptive to that message. The effectiveness of a car dealership advertisement in a Harry Potter movie preview? Lots of eyeballs, few if any looking for a car. In a search query on cars? Lots of eyeballs, many if not most of which are looking for a car. This is what makes search advertising an insanely better advertising vehicle then pretty much any other form of advertisement. Now lets look at maps on mobile devices. This has the same fundamental super power as search advertising, mobile maps are a search api. Many people don't put that together but when you are using your mobile device's maps you are seeking out directions, what you are looking for signals intent, and on that intent one can build a very profitable advertising platform. If I pull out my iPad and click 'coffee shops' on the maps search box I have signaled both where I am, and that I'm looking for a coffee shop. As a shop owner how much would you pay to have that person go to your shop? $0.50? $1? $2? How do you know your ad worked? Well there is an NFC payment, or a coupon you can offer up on the mobile device, or your local WiFi hotspot (remember that?) can tell you that the wifi mac address of the device that did the maps search, just walked into range of your hotspot. Do you see it yet? Mobile Maps is as big a business as Google's search advertising business and its still un-plundered. Apple will do everything they can to 'dominate' this particular 'free to use' service. [1] Best scene ever in "Charlie's War"

obeattie 14y ago

> Was it just too expensive? That's possible, especially if these negotiations happened during the time Google massively raised the prices on its API I think the figure was that Apple had $117bn or so IN CASH at the end of Q2. Whatever it was, money cannot have been the issue here. (Also, consider the cost of developing the new Maps.app in-house. Huge.)

therandomguy 14y ago
If I had $500 in my pocket I would still not pay $20 for a latte.
- snogglethorpe 14y ago
  > If I had $500 in my pocket I would still not pay $20 for a latte. ... but the alternative here is alienating half their users. They don't have to pay Google forever, they just have to pay them until they actually get their own mapping infrastructure into a usable state. Nobody likes paying too much, but sometimes the alternative is far worse, and you're much better off just swallowing your pride and doing it.

rhizome 14y ago

Release early, release often. Luckily Apple themselves don't have any delays getting revisions into their app store.

WiseWeasel 14y ago
The only issue is that since Maps is a default app, not managed by the App Store, Apple has to push OS updates to update it in any way, which is somewhat of a barrier to adoption.
- outworlder 14y ago
  And yet that shouldn't be a problem if the issue lies in the server's data.
- microtherion 14y ago
  But the problems reported are all data problems, which presumably can be fixed in the cloud. No app update needed at all.
  - WiseWeasel 14y ago
    Yeah, not only that, but you can apparently register your iOS app as a routing app for Maps, and its content will be integrated into the Maps app for users who install it. http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/20/embark_garmin_add_public_transit_support_for_apples_ios_6_maps http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/20/embark_garmin_add_...

psychotik 14y ago

That makes sense, but you miss one point - Google isn't the only game in town. Why not contract with Bing, which has it's own mapping app on iOS and use that for iOS 6 (either permanently, or as a stop gap while you perfect your own mapping software). I would be surprised if Microsoft would reject that offer, given that it would help them get more search share and mindshare. I wonder if they tried this at all.

nikcub 14y ago

> what happened in contract negotiations with Google to force it out. This is almost certainly Apple being pissed off about Android and continuing to untie themselves from Google. It just isn't working out as well as they had planned. Google give Maps for free to other providers as well, as long as you bundle search/gmail with it. Apple decided to pick out and replace the only part that Google don't make money on in iOS, the part that had the most technical risk and the part that Android completely kick their ass on. Google right now are asking why they should bother going to the trouble of producing a no-revenue Maps app for iOS when so many users suddenly discovered a greater appreciation for Android today. Apple completely screwed up here. In more ways than one - and it was all because of a grudge.