3 ms·

Obvious troll is obvious, but I'll bite. Here's a single way that iOS 6 maps are better: 3D flyover. It's fantastic for trying to navigate around a city whi

Obvious troll is obvious, but I'll bite. Here's a single way that iOS 6 maps are better: 3D flyover. It's fantastic for trying to navigate around a city while travelling, which I used today. I like it better than Street View - though Street View is better when you're on foot and need to find the entrance to a specific street address. So, overall iOS 6 maps aren't as good as Google Maps, completely agree, this is a debacle. But there's one feature I like.

adgar 14y ago
I wasn't trolling. 3d flyover? One quick query for [google maps 3d] gives this as the top result: http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/ http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/ And yes, there's textures available for those maps too, assuming those were what helped you so much in your navigation and not the 3d models. Of course, Google has 3d models all around the world, including the small college towns Apple has completely failed at, since Google has been encouraging contributions to their maps data for years now. Why not pull up Google Earth and trivially take a spin around your favorite city in the world right now? Also, I genuinely don't believe this: > It's fantastic for trying to navigate around a city while travelling, which I used today. Oh, I'm sure you used it today. Definitely believe that. But I genuinely don't believe that a 3d, angled view of a city gave you a better navigational experience than a traditional accurate map and directions. Which you definitely didn't have if you were using Apple maps. It's probably nice to be able to get a view of the major, tall landmarks in a city and orient yourself around that. An overall pretty user experience for orientation. But navigation? You used the relative height of 3d buildings to navigate around a large city instead of GPS and a map with correct POI data, streets, directions, and transit information and found using the pictures and heights of buildings superior? I think you're lying. Either to us, or to yourself. Or both, I guess. Yeah, definitely both.

adgar 14y ago

I wasn't trolling. 3d flyover? One quick query for [google maps 3d] gives this as the top result: http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/ http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/ And yes, there's textures available for those maps too, assuming those were what helped you so much in your navigation and not the 3d models. Of course, Google has 3d models all around the world, including the small college towns Apple has completely failed at, since Google has been encouraging contributions to their maps data for years now. Why not pull up Google Earth and trivially take a spin around your favorite city in the world right now? Also, I genuinely don't believe this: > It's fantastic for trying to navigate around a city while travelling, which I used today. Oh, I'm sure you used it today. Definitely believe that. But I genuinely don't believe that a 3d, angled view of a city gave you a better navigational experience than a traditional accurate map and directions. Which you definitely didn't have if you were using Apple maps. It's probably nice to be able to get a view of the major, tall landmarks in a city and orient yourself around that. An overall pretty user experience for orientation. But navigation? You used the relative height of 3d buildings to navigate around a large city instead of GPS and a map with correct POI data, streets, directions, and transit information and found using the pictures and heights of buildings superior? I think you're lying. Either to us, or to yourself. Or both, I guess. Yeah, definitely both.