10 ms·

Google Maps' advantage over Apple Maps

239 points by sern 14y ago

nicholassmith 14y ago
I'm not sure where the 400 year aspect comes from, but this is probably one of the best bits of technical writing I've read on the whole iOS6 Maps issues.
blrgeek 14y ago
The article has no mention of why this is a 400 year advantage - or how long it will take for Apple to get over this. He lays out very well that a human element is required to bring these streams of data together. And Apple is not a company with the DNA of big data. Just algorithmic manipulation of the data is not possible or sufficient - they will need an army to integrate these streams and bring them up to par. And Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.
- ericHosick 14y ago
  Maybe the 400 years referes to the number of people-years used to manually clean up map information?
  - masklinn 14y ago
    Thats how I read it. Although frankly speaking, if anything 400 man-years seems very low for worldwide mapping.
    - dvanduzer 14y ago
      Don't underestimate the value of legwork and algorithms. edit: I... I skimmed the article the first time, but... The author actually claims that it's a data quality problem, not an algorithm problem. Huh?! second edit: I guess my only real contention is that "data quality" is a fake idea.
  - dvanduzer 14y ago
    So it's a problem that $4 billion could solve in a few days, right?
    - blrgeek 14y ago
      If you can get 14600 workers who can do this work and the software, you could do it in 10 days.
      - dvanduzer 14y ago
        I thought it was reasonably entertaining to consider 400 salary years at $100k each just to see what the numbers looked like. Apple has had trouble with Big Data, in the parlance, but iCloud is still running. They've made some pretty dumb mistakes with their online services over the years, but they still do happen to be syncing data (if even just push notifications) to something on the order of a hundred million devices. Catching up to where Google Maps is today will take somewhere between 10 days and 400 years. I'll bet good money that they have this nailed within a 95% tolerance before next year's new hardware model.
        blrgeek 14y ago
        From what I've heard, Google had an army of around 1000+ contract workers in Hyderabad, India, cleaning up the data for about 5 years. If anything 400 man-years sounds low :) This is apart from MapMaker, and their dev teams, and their software improvements. For instance, if you look at directions in India now, they're awesome, since they tell you landmarks to look for on the way [pass by * on left], at the intersections, etc. http://goo.gl/maps/b8w15 http://goo.gl/maps/b8w15 for instance. My guess is 95% will take 3-4 years - once they accept they have a problem.
        dvanduzer 14y ago
        I don't think 3-4 years is a crazy estimate. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. If you hadn't already seen it, the Atlantic piece on the technology is a fantastic read: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go... On the other hand, this actually is one of the rarer problems where throwing 10,000 contract workers from India for 5 months could solve much of the problem, especially since Google has already paved the way on the harder parts. What I really want to see is a serious quality comparison between Apple and OSM. edit: And the million dollar question... How much of Google's map data was correlated/verified against iPhone positioning data?
- john-n 14y ago
  I believe the 400 years is referring to Apple failing on basic principles of map making which have been around for a long time. Possibly a reference to "Nova totius Terrarum Orbis", a famous atlas from 1630?
zalew 14y ago
TIL about Google Map Maker. Just corrected a few issues in my neighborhood, they got approved, I wonder when they get into Google Maps. Anyone knows how long it takes? Google's email sent to me just says "Soon you will be able to see your edit live on Google Maps."
- jeffpalmer 14y ago
  From the FAQ: "How does Reviewing work? Why is my edit still pending/not yet live on Maps?" "All new edits need to be reviewed by another mapper. The more you successfully contribute to Map Maker, the more trust you will gain in the system and the easier it will be for you to make and review other changes to the map. If your edit is still pending and not on Google Maps, it has likely not been reviewed yet. You can post the links to the edits you’ve made on the review edit requests forum, so that your fellow mappers can review your map changes, enabling your edit to go live once approved by enough people with enough trust in Map Maker. Learn more about how reviewing and the moderation process works here."
  - zalew 14y ago
    email #1 "Thank you for helping to improve Google Maps. Once approved, your contribution will appear on Google Maps for everyone to see. Thanks and happy mapping! " email #2 "Congratulations! We have made changes based on your suggestion on Map Maker. Soon you will be able to see your edit live on Google Maps. Thank you for your contribution to Google Map Maker, and happy mapping! " it's got status 'published'. is it pending some another review? I've read the faq and learn more, but still have no clue, the terminology is vague and a post from 2010 on a discussion group says 4-6 months to live.
    - tonfa 14y ago
      From my previous edits, I think it's in the order of weeks.
      - iaskwhy 14y ago
        Two to three weeks on my unique attempt since I reported it. Maybe because it was a major location, in Westminster there was an Iceland store showing on top of Parliament Square.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
hythloday 14y ago
"[Apple's] problem is that they thought they did not have a problem." Crucial insight, there. From the perspective of an observer who has no special affection for Apple, it's surprising that a company of that competence would succumb to such a basic process error.
- peteretep 14y ago
  This is the first event that people will put down to a lack of Steve Jobs that I think actually might reflect that...
  - 0x006A 14y ago
    the decision to switch to there own maps was made while jobs was around. its also not the first time apple replaces a product with an inferior option and insists its better, final cut pro x comes to mind.
    - agumonkey 14y ago
      Didn't they address user concerns with a .1 upgrade or was it a placebo pill ?
      - 0x006A 14y ago
        nothing really changed with .1, they added some placebo fixes, like xml import/export (except that its a new xml format that only represents trivial edits and thus is useless).
    - peteretep 14y ago
      Yes, but not the decision to ship it in its current form.
  - dasil003 14y ago
    Would Jobs have the balls to release iOS 6 with no Maps at all for a year or more while they scramble to catch up? Those would be some huge cajones.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
ed_blackburn 14y ago
The suggestion to acquire TomTom is certainly bold and thought provoking. If you live in a city like London maps is essential and a core feature for phones. Google must be pissing themselves laughing. Just as Apple get their act together google will probably wade in with a killer app? OR will they? Perhaps they'll not bother and use it as a marketing ploy to push Android? Fascinating article.
cageface 14y ago
Where was Apple's QA on this? This seems like a colossal oversight for a company previously known for sweating all the small details.
- sabret00the 14y ago
  QA on the scale of what they needed wouldn't work. You have to bare in mind that Apple like to keep things close to their chest. To have at least one person per city testing this worldwide was impossible.
  - spinchange 14y ago
    For the most valuable company on earth, with more cash reserves in the bank than the entire value of most companies? Google has street view cars roaming the planet. I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority.
    - blrgeek 14y ago
      > I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority. Only if they realized it. It took Google 3 years to realize that they couldn't solve it algorithmically.
      - zem 14y ago
        if you and i know that google tried for three years and then realised humans were needed, why would you think the people over at apple do not?
- locopati 14y ago
  My guess would be QA found lots of problems, reported them, fought for them, and, at the end of the day, deadlines are deadlines and the maps app shipped. QA is not some magical barrier and usually is overridden when a go/no-go decision meets are hard ship date (like 'this device must be released now because there's an entire supply chain and retail chain that needs to be coordinated').
metatronscube 14y ago
I think Apple should look to hire someone like this to help draw together the various problems with their maps app (However for a first attempt I think its fine). Its not insurmountable problem, and given what Apple is capable of, its something they can make better with a bit of effort.
sabret00the 14y ago
My biggest disappointment regarding this whole matter is that as a result, OSM is getting a lot of negative criticism. More-so than Tom-Tom.
- lispm 14y ago
  But why? OSM is not really used by Apple in the current map app, AFAIK.
  - ZeroGravitas 14y ago
    I assume, like Yahoo/Flickr used OSM in places like Beijing and Bagdad, that Apple only uses OSM to fill in the gaps were their commercial sources are weak and, to be frank, where it only needs to be better than nothing.
jpswade 14y ago
The headline doesn't seem to come up in the article at all.
- john-n 14y ago
  As I mentioned above, I believe he's referring to the 400 year history of map making which Apple appears to have ignored, in part at least.
pohl 14y ago
Excellent post, full of valuable insight. Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project. Does anybody know what this means? Don't the queries I make go through their servers, and isn't my location a relevant parameter for those queries? I don't see why this can't be mined.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  I think what it means is that Google had lots of queries of the form: <thing> (e.g. "restaurant") <location> (e.g "Times Square") that came in through the search engine "front door". Having a lot of relevant questions (and hard data on which answers to those questions were used) is an invaluable resource in bootstrapping mapping and local search together.
zenocon 14y ago
> My overall view of the companies that it (Apple) has assembled to create its application is that they are, as a whole, rated “C-grade” suppliers. This just amazes me. For the longest time there were really only two suppliers of data: Tele Atlas and NAVTEQ. Everything else wasn't worth touching b/c the quality sucked. Then Google collected their own in their little cars and stopped paying suppliers. I'm not sure why Apple didn't have the foresight to understand this was an enormous engineering effort from Google - not only collecting their own data but the whole platform itself. I worked as a consultant for one of the two major data suppliers for 3 years rebuilding their backend. 400 years sounds like a reasonable swag.
- blrgeek 14y ago
  Isn't the TomTom data really the Tele Atlas data set? Apple has no lack of hubris - in some things they succeed spectacularly beyond all expectations, and in others - well MobileMe, Ping, and now Maps...
  - zenocon 14y ago
    Yes, Tele Atlas was acquired by Tom Tom about 5-6 years ago, so it is the same.
- akldfgj 14y ago
  How does Google get satellite view data without suppliers?
  - mullingitover 14y ago
    Easy: they bought their own freaking satellite. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/08/first-google-satellite-launched/1 http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/08/first-google-satelli...
davestheraves 14y ago
It always surprises me how a company which prides itself on UX, and having reinvented UX can repeatedly screw it up big time with core things, maps, email (MobileMe when that was launched). I just wonder why fix something that ain't broke and make it worse!
lispm 14y ago
The article does not really provide much new information. That mapping is hard is known. That there are companies who have much experience in this area and that Apple will have to compete with them is known - from Google, over Garmin to Nokia. It's just that it is hard and that it will take Apple a lot of time and investment to bring the mapping functionality to a better level. I'm pretty sure Apple knows that. It's just the first iteration. Apple works that way. Bring a product or service in a first iteration and then improve from there. This is how the iPod evolved, for example. Aperture, another example. The current maps application in iOS already has a feedback interface. This helps to improve the data. But there are a few things which need more consideration: * the 3d view looks ugly when looked at close to the objects. The 3d reconstruction algorithm which creates a 3d view from images is problematic. * the angle of the data from Tomtom is for car users. Other users have less benefit: there is a lack of detail and the usage perspective renders the map in a certain way. For example here in Europe there are a lot of local public transit users. They have a hard time identifying useful informations on the current maps. * combination with all kinds of POIs. You need to get that data and have it constantly updated. Where is a shop, when is it open, where is a museum, where are interesting views, where is a difficult road condition, ... Probably the mapping domain is the toughest Apple has touched in years. You need a really good idea how to deal with the challenges. Personally, I think it is worth it, but it will be a lot of work (and not of machines, but also of humans) and very expensive for Apple. I'd wish they would use more of Openstreetmap and that there would be a benefit for the Openstreetmap community.
- blrgeek 14y ago
  The article actually breaks down the exact lacunae in Apple's approach - it's certainly has more map domain specific insight than all the other articles on iOS6 Maps put together. And it has recommendations which are very specific and not hand-wavy. From the article 1. Completeness – Features are absent and some features that are included seem to have erroneous attributes and relationships. 2. Logical Consistency - Expecting the data across different sources to be completely consistent ie 'An example of this could be having a store’s name, street number and street name correct, but mapping it in the wrong place' 3. Positional Accuracy – is considered the closeness of a coordinate value to values accepted as being true 4. Temporal Accuracy – particularly in respect to temporal validity – are the features that they map still in existence today? 5. Thematic Accuracy – particularly in respect to non-quantitative attribute correctness and classification correctness.
emehrkay 14y ago
Maps is the only example that I can think of when compared head to head, Google makes better software. I hope people will continue to complain because it will force apple to get their shit together and put out a better product. Myapple maps experience is north compared with my Google maps , however, I haven't had any notable issues with apple amps in the Baltimore area.
- netcan 14y ago
  What about search?
  - gurkendoktor 14y ago
    Apple has no web search so it can't be compared - I guess.
napierzaza 14y ago
It's really boring reading tech bloggers comment on hugely complex and expensive operations like mapping the entire earth. It takes a really long time, and Apple can't just throw money at it either.
btilly 14y ago
Articles like this make me suspect that http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517 was an extremely accurate description of Apple's problems. I wonder how long it will take for the outside world's expectations of Apple to drop to what they should be in the permanent absence of the gaze of Barad-dûr?
DanBC 14y ago
> I suspect that Apple does not yet understand what a headache it will be to integrate the information from these three disparate sources. This is ridiculous in the year 2012. Nothing about this should be a headache (apart from people keeping their data secret for various reasons) yet it's still bafflingly hard.
- sethg 14y ago
  I’ve been hip-deep in this kind of thing for years, and it really is hard. Suppose that data source A has a point for “Logan Airport” and data source B has a point (a few hundred feet away) for “General Edward Lawrence Logan International Airport” and data source C has a separate data point for every terminal.... on a case-by-case basis it’s not hard to resolve questions like this, but when you try to come up with an algorithm that scales to tens of millions of map features, you spend a lot of time scratching your head saying “why did it do THAT?!?!”
brudgers 14y ago
I've come to the conclusion that Apple is willing to bet that mediocrity in maps is not really a deal breaker in the segment of the mobile electronics market in which they operate...or rather continued mediocrity will have little effect on sales. Nobody, including Google, consistently delivers functional map data to mobile devices every time, at least not in the Atlanta metro area. I travel there with some frequency for various soccer tournaments as a referee or parent. It is not uncommon for one or another device to provide faulty routing to the people involved in a match. Sometimes it's Garmin. Sometimes it's Android. sometimes Bing. People don't primarily buy smartphones for the maps any more than people primarily buy smartphones based on call quality. Apple knows this. Apple sells phones because of iTunes and brand positioning. The issues with maps didn't even garner a comment among the Apple fans in yesterday's Facebook feed. The edge cases among iPhone users that will be lost over poor quality maps is more than offset by the Genius's sales pitch about how easy Apple's map application is to use.
- bmeckel 14y ago
  I don't think that's their thinking actually. I think they knew it would be near impossible to have a product at launch be as impressive as googles and they're ok with that. However, by deploying in a mandatory setting with such a large user base they can catch up to Google quickly. Who knows though, they may have legitimately overlooked it.
  - brudgers 14y ago
    For years, Google has been sending fleets of specially equipped cars down countless roads in order to help verify their map data. It is impossible to imagine Apple undertaking such a massive and unsexy project as a first mover, nevermind as in an effort which would obviously be copying Google. What has changed as Apple has scaled is that they are willing to weather a PR storm.
    - bmeckel 14y ago
      I don't think street view is what made google that much better than maps. It's the search that works, and detailed maps, which were around from before street view. But I do think you're partially right on the apple front, but they do stuff that pisses people off all the time, the difference is that it's usually taking out a feature (like Ethernet) that is only beginning to be phased out by the other tech companies. The big difference is that the maps change doesn't just bother geeks, but gets at their main user base, which they're usually pretty careful about.
bloggez 14y ago
And Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.
raldi 14y ago
I'm sorry, but can someone paste the part of this article where Google announces anything about 400 years? I can't find it.
- prawks 14y ago
  I'm thinking it's a ploy to get people to read yet another criticism of Apple's new maps. We get it, they're bad. EDIT: Frankly, I think it's pretty hilarious this article is so long and formal.
  - ImprovedSilence 14y ago
    I actually found this article to be the first one that didn't just criticize Apple, but actually made suggestions about how they should go about fixing it. It was rather interesting for someone like me who has no experience in map making, to see how much is really involved in digital cartography. edit: on a related note, I always took google maps for granted, but now that I realize how fantastic of an effort it must take to map the world to the degree they do, I have much more respect for it, and I think it is amazing in terms of "cataloging the worlds information".
    - martian 14y ago
      The Atlantic recently wrote up a nice piece on Google Maps. It explores just how complex the whole operation is, how many humans and machines are involved in making Google's maps... http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go...
      - ImprovedSilence 14y ago
        Very interesting article, thanks for the read.
      - vsl 14y ago
        That article is a bit infamous for its over-the-top advertisement value by now. See e.g. http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=394 http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=394
yock 14y ago
What is most amusing to me about this whole thing is that two weeks ago The Atlantic published[0] an article offering incredible insight into just how much effort goes into making Google's maps so good. Was it already too late at that point for Apple to see this and think that maybe they hadn't thought this thing through? The only alternatives I can think of are blindingly foolish. Either they thought they engineered their way out of a problem at which Google throws literally hundreds of people or they didn't bother to read the article in the first place. 0 - http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go...
- Splines 14y ago
  We don't know about what the negotiations were like between Apple and Google. Given that the Youtube app was also pulled, there's probably some political maneuverings going on. Google pretty much pulled the rug out from under Apple's feet (whether this was Google taking their ball and going home, or Apple's hubris we don't know). If Apple doesn't provide a coherent story in the next few weeks/months, this may actually have a bottom-line impact on the iPhone 5 and iOS6.
- ricardobeat 14y ago
  Maybe they just didn't have enough time? Google Maps has been around for 7 years (more than that pre-acquisition).
- randomdata 14y ago
  It seems most likely that contract negotiations broke down and Apple lost access to Google map data completely, leaving them left to replace the Maps service as quickly as possible. There is no logical reason for Apple to just walk away from a good deal just because it is Google.
- Havoc 14y ago
  My thoughts exactly. I remember when I read the article about the Google approach I thought...holy shit. If the _best_ Google could come up with was throwing manpower at the problem then anybody else should think really carefully about their solution if it doesn't involve similar manpower.
corporalagumbo 14y ago
I remember reading a while ago about how Apple's reliance on Google for mapping was a massive problem for the company. Something about how in the future all ad revenue will derive from location-based recommendations. If that's true, then there was no other acceptable solution for Apple than to at some point simply bite the bullet and roll out an in-house mapping service. Continuing dependence on Google here simply posed too much risk to ad revenue and indeed the basic integrity of their ecosystem. All things considered, given how complex maps must be to implement, it seems like Apple did a pretty good job for day one. Furthermore, this furore reminds me of the storm over Siri. Tech pundits work themselves into a frenzy proclaiming that Apple is losing its edge. Average consumers however pay no heed and the company rolls on to the next product launch largely unharmed. The critics miss the bigger picture: a company with so much momentum that it can easily afford to crowdsource the refinement of challenging big-data projects such as Siri and Maps. While the critics stand around prophesising doom, Apple iterates, improves, and by the time the next big hit comes out the last "disaster" is ancient history. Ignore their strength at your peril I say.
- efuquen 14y ago
  "Something about how in the future all ad revenue will derive from location-based recommendations" And why exactly should Apple care about this? Isn't the vast majority of their profit coming from higher then normal margins on hardware? Their bread and butter is suppose to be making compelling tech products that have high build quality and are easy to use for any type of user. Why would Apple care where ad dollars are going as long as they kept doing what they are suppose to be doing to justify their high margin devices? Apple isn't in the ad business. Of course, with their map move they've just compromised the quality of one of the core services of a mobile device, that should be a bigger deal then any of this nonsense about location based recommendations being the future of ad revenue.
  - corporalagumbo 14y ago
    From what I understand search and ad revenue is one of Apple's revenue streams - I have no idea how large nor how to project growth. Just rehashing a vague memory. Anyway I think there are plenty of good reasons for Apple to pursue its own maps solution; eventually all technology will be fully location-gnostic, so it seems like a pretty critical technology to me. If I were Apple I wouldn't be happy leaving that in the hands of a malicious competitor either. And when you have one of the world's largest customer bases to beta-test with... why not? Seems like pulling a tooth to me - best just to get it over with quickly, and you're glad once you do. You call it compromising the quality of a core service, Apple might argue that effectively unless that service was in-house it was not adequate, so effectively never existed, and what they've done is get started on building the service they should have had a while ago.
stevewilhelm 14y ago
One solution: Apple acquires Yahoo and Nokia, or at least the Yahoo search and Nokia map teams.
snuze 14y ago
I used turn-by-turn directions yesterday and everything worked fine. I think people are blowing the whole thing way out of proportion. If Google Maps was so great, why did Google never add turn-by-turn directions to the iOS app? My guess is that they were simply holding it over Apple.
- camiller 14y ago
  Most of the complaints I've seen had nothing to do with turn by turn navigation. It is more about where points of interest are on the maps, airports in the wrong place etc.
terminus 14y ago
> You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing that these maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by Apple’s customers and not by Apple’s QC teams. Wasn't iOS6 in public beta for a few months?
- cbs 14y ago
  Public beta is apple's customers, not a QA team.
jsz0 14y ago
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Apple's Maps. It doesn't excuse the pain it will cause users in the short term but I don't see anything that is going to be a long term problem for Apple. It's now just a process of fixing errors, stocking more POI information, and working with their partners/sources to continue improving the platform. There was never going to be a point where they could make this switch gracefully.
jamesrcole 14y ago
In bigger-picture terms, Apple doing their own maps is surely a good thing because of the competition it creates. Surely it's going to end up pushing improvements in maps technology.
stcredzero 14y ago
> Perhaps the most egregious error is that Apple’s team relied on quality control by algorithm and not a process partially vetted by informed human analysis. You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing that these maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by Apple’s customers and not by Apple’s QC teams Reminds me of the days when Microsoft used to release software that customers would call "beta-quality" and wonder if they were being used as unpaid QA.
6ren 14y ago
> [if you follow] Google’s attempts at developing a quality mapping service, you will notice that they initially tried to automate the entire process and failed miserably, as Apple has. And they can improve, as Google did. But customers are very forgiving of mistakes and iteration when your product is the first and best (so far); plus, Apple's key branding is quality. > Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project This is an interesting competitive advantage Google has that is really really hard to beat. Similar to what Facebook has. But... perhaps Apple also has data? e.g. from Siri queries? They can certainly gather it now, now that their mapping app is being used.
robomartin 14y ago
The real question is: How many Apple users or would-be Apple users consider mapping to be critically important? This could be a very interesting case study on sales of an otherwise great product being hurt by a move that cripples a critically important element of said product. I've already met several people with iPhone 4's (or older) who said they are not upgrading to either iOS6 or iPhone 5 because of the mapping issue. I am part of that group as well. I'll have to buy an iPhone 5 for development purposes but I don't think I'll have it as my primary phone until the whole maps business is sorted out. Mapping seems to be one of those things that you can't design your way around. In other words, nobody cares about beautiful inaccurate maps. This could be one of the first challenges on Apples's desk that can't be solved with cute commercials and pretty design. It has to be good and at least equal to, if not better than, Google's offering. Regrettably sometimes the only way to get good at something is to start doing it. At first you'll probably suck at it but, with time and effort, you'll get better and better. This is Apple getting on that path to excelling at mapping. It'll take time. There's no doubt that they have the financial resources to make it happen. Now it is about execution.
stmartin 14y ago
Arrogance doth have a steep price. Let's hope Apple can pay for it.
zoowar 14y ago
Street View QED
josh33 14y ago
This smells like a resume to apple from someone wanting to be hired. I can't fault that, but using link bait initially to score high on HN, getting on Apple's radar makes me feel used.
tsycho 14y ago
This is probably the first time (IMHO) when the "title-change by mods" made complete sense. The old "400 years" title was pure link-bait.
lekanwang 14y ago
There was an amazing blog post (http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read... http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read...) on 41Latitude when it still around about the absolute thing of beauty and art that is the labeling and visual design of Google Maps that enable it to have extremely high data density, while maintaining perhaps the best readability of any of the interactive maps out there. Correctness is the most glaring issue, but it's far, far more that sets Google apart from what Apple launched in their maps application. EDIT: Here is an archived version found elsewhere: http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-amp-Label-Readability-Part-3 http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-am...
shanecleveland 14y ago
For all the problems there may be with Apple's maps, the directions to my house have actually improved. Google maps has recognizes a road that has been closed for about 15 years as still open, and it uses the closed road for most requesting directions to my house (and probably anyone else in my vicinity). Apple maps got it right.

239 points by sern 14y ago

I'm not sure where the 400 year aspect comes from, but this is probably one of the best bits of technical writing I've read on the whole iOS6 Maps issues.

blrgeek 14y ago

The article has no mention of why this is a 400 year advantage - or how long it will take for Apple to get over this. He lays out very well that a human element is required to bring these streams of data together. And Apple is not a company with the DNA of big data. Just algorithmic manipulation of the data is not possible or sufficient - they will need an army to integrate these streams and bring them up to par. And Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.

ericHosick 14y ago
Maybe the 400 years referes to the number of people-years used to manually clean up map information?
- masklinn 14y ago
  Thats how I read it. Although frankly speaking, if anything 400 man-years seems very low for worldwide mapping.
  - dvanduzer 14y ago
    Don't underestimate the value of legwork and algorithms. edit: I... I skimmed the article the first time, but... The author actually claims that it's a data quality problem, not an algorithm problem. Huh?! second edit: I guess my only real contention is that "data quality" is a fake idea.
- dvanduzer 14y ago
  So it's a problem that $4 billion could solve in a few days, right?
  - blrgeek 14y ago
    If you can get 14600 workers who can do this work and the software, you could do it in 10 days.
    - dvanduzer 14y ago
      I thought it was reasonably entertaining to consider 400 salary years at $100k each just to see what the numbers looked like. Apple has had trouble with Big Data, in the parlance, but iCloud is still running. They've made some pretty dumb mistakes with their online services over the years, but they still do happen to be syncing data (if even just push notifications) to something on the order of a hundred million devices. Catching up to where Google Maps is today will take somewhere between 10 days and 400 years. I'll bet good money that they have this nailed within a 95% tolerance before next year's new hardware model.
      - blrgeek 14y ago
        From what I've heard, Google had an army of around 1000+ contract workers in Hyderabad, India, cleaning up the data for about 5 years. If anything 400 man-years sounds low :) This is apart from MapMaker, and their dev teams, and their software improvements. For instance, if you look at directions in India now, they're awesome, since they tell you landmarks to look for on the way [pass by * on left], at the intersections, etc. http://goo.gl/maps/b8w15 http://goo.gl/maps/b8w15 for instance. My guess is 95% will take 3-4 years - once they accept they have a problem.
        dvanduzer 14y ago
        I don't think 3-4 years is a crazy estimate. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. If you hadn't already seen it, the Atlantic piece on the technology is a fantastic read: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go... On the other hand, this actually is one of the rarer problems where throwing 10,000 contract workers from India for 5 months could solve much of the problem, especially since Google has already paved the way on the harder parts. What I really want to see is a serious quality comparison between Apple and OSM. edit: And the million dollar question... How much of Google's map data was correlated/verified against iPhone positioning data?
john-n 14y ago
I believe the 400 years is referring to Apple failing on basic principles of map making which have been around for a long time. Possibly a reference to "Nova totius Terrarum Orbis", a famous atlas from 1630?

zalew 14y ago

TIL about Google Map Maker. Just corrected a few issues in my neighborhood, they got approved, I wonder when they get into Google Maps. Anyone knows how long it takes? Google's email sent to me just says "Soon you will be able to see your edit live on Google Maps."

jeffpalmer 14y ago
From the FAQ: "How does Reviewing work? Why is my edit still pending/not yet live on Maps?" "All new edits need to be reviewed by another mapper. The more you successfully contribute to Map Maker, the more trust you will gain in the system and the easier it will be for you to make and review other changes to the map. If your edit is still pending and not on Google Maps, it has likely not been reviewed yet. You can post the links to the edits you’ve made on the review edit requests forum, so that your fellow mappers can review your map changes, enabling your edit to go live once approved by enough people with enough trust in Map Maker. Learn more about how reviewing and the moderation process works here."
- zalew 14y ago
  email #1 "Thank you for helping to improve Google Maps. Once approved, your contribution will appear on Google Maps for everyone to see. Thanks and happy mapping! " email #2 "Congratulations! We have made changes based on your suggestion on Map Maker. Soon you will be able to see your edit live on Google Maps. Thank you for your contribution to Google Map Maker, and happy mapping! " it's got status 'published'. is it pending some another review? I've read the faq and learn more, but still have no clue, the terminology is vague and a post from 2010 on a discussion group says 4-6 months to live.
  - tonfa 14y ago
    From my previous edits, I think it's in the order of weeks.
    - iaskwhy 14y ago
      Two to three weeks on my unique attempt since I reported it. Maybe because it was a major location, in Westminster there was an Iceland store showing on top of Parliament Square.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

hythloday 14y ago

"[Apple's] problem is that they thought they did not have a problem." Crucial insight, there. From the perspective of an observer who has no special affection for Apple, it's surprising that a company of that competence would succumb to such a basic process error.

peteretep 14y ago
This is the first event that people will put down to a lack of Steve Jobs that I think actually might reflect that...
- 0x006A 14y ago
  the decision to switch to there own maps was made while jobs was around. its also not the first time apple replaces a product with an inferior option and insists its better, final cut pro x comes to mind.
  - agumonkey 14y ago
    Didn't they address user concerns with a .1 upgrade or was it a placebo pill ?
    - 0x006A 14y ago
      nothing really changed with .1, they added some placebo fixes, like xml import/export (except that its a new xml format that only represents trivial edits and thus is useless).
  - peteretep 14y ago
    Yes, but not the decision to ship it in its current form.
- dasil003 14y ago
  Would Jobs have the balls to release iOS 6 with no Maps at all for a year or more while they scramble to catch up? Those would be some huge cajones.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

ed_blackburn 14y ago

The suggestion to acquire TomTom is certainly bold and thought provoking. If you live in a city like London maps is essential and a core feature for phones. Google must be pissing themselves laughing. Just as Apple get their act together google will probably wade in with a killer app? OR will they? Perhaps they'll not bother and use it as a marketing ploy to push Android? Fascinating article.

cageface 14y ago

Where was Apple's QA on this? This seems like a colossal oversight for a company previously known for sweating all the small details.

sabret00the 14y ago
QA on the scale of what they needed wouldn't work. You have to bare in mind that Apple like to keep things close to their chest. To have at least one person per city testing this worldwide was impossible.
- spinchange 14y ago
  For the most valuable company on earth, with more cash reserves in the bank than the entire value of most companies? Google has street view cars roaming the planet. I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority.
  - blrgeek 14y ago
    > I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority. Only if they realized it. It took Google 3 years to realize that they couldn't solve it algorithmically.
    - zem 14y ago
      if you and i know that google tried for three years and then realised humans were needed, why would you think the people over at apple do not?
locopati 14y ago
My guess would be QA found lots of problems, reported them, fought for them, and, at the end of the day, deadlines are deadlines and the maps app shipped. QA is not some magical barrier and usually is overridden when a go/no-go decision meets are hard ship date (like 'this device must be released now because there's an entire supply chain and retail chain that needs to be coordinated').

metatronscube 14y ago

I think Apple should look to hire someone like this to help draw together the various problems with their maps app (However for a first attempt I think its fine). Its not insurmountable problem, and given what Apple is capable of, its something they can make better with a bit of effort.

sabret00the 14y ago

My biggest disappointment regarding this whole matter is that as a result, OSM is getting a lot of negative criticism. More-so than Tom-Tom.

lispm 14y ago
But why? OSM is not really used by Apple in the current map app, AFAIK.
- ZeroGravitas 14y ago
  I assume, like Yahoo/Flickr used OSM in places like Beijing and Bagdad, that Apple only uses OSM to fill in the gaps were their commercial sources are weak and, to be frank, where it only needs to be better than nothing.

jpswade 14y ago

The headline doesn't seem to come up in the article at all.

john-n 14y ago
As I mentioned above, I believe he's referring to the 400 year history of map making which Apple appears to have ignored, in part at least.

pohl 14y ago

Excellent post, full of valuable insight. Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project. Does anybody know what this means? Don't the queries I make go through their servers, and isn't my location a relevant parameter for those queries? I don't see why this can't be mined.

fpgeek 14y ago
I think what it means is that Google had lots of queries of the form: <thing> (e.g. "restaurant") <location> (e.g "Times Square") that came in through the search engine "front door". Having a lot of relevant questions (and hard data on which answers to those questions were used) is an invaluable resource in bootstrapping mapping and local search together.

zenocon 14y ago

> My overall view of the companies that it (Apple) has assembled to create its application is that they are, as a whole, rated “C-grade” suppliers. This just amazes me. For the longest time there were really only two suppliers of data: Tele Atlas and NAVTEQ. Everything else wasn't worth touching b/c the quality sucked. Then Google collected their own in their little cars and stopped paying suppliers. I'm not sure why Apple didn't have the foresight to understand this was an enormous engineering effort from Google - not only collecting their own data but the whole platform itself. I worked as a consultant for one of the two major data suppliers for 3 years rebuilding their backend. 400 years sounds like a reasonable swag.

blrgeek 14y ago
Isn't the TomTom data really the Tele Atlas data set? Apple has no lack of hubris - in some things they succeed spectacularly beyond all expectations, and in others - well MobileMe, Ping, and now Maps...
- zenocon 14y ago
  Yes, Tele Atlas was acquired by Tom Tom about 5-6 years ago, so it is the same.
akldfgj 14y ago
How does Google get satellite view data without suppliers?
- mullingitover 14y ago
  Easy: they bought their own freaking satellite. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/08/first-google-satellite-launched/1 http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/08/first-google-satelli...

davestheraves 14y ago

It always surprises me how a company which prides itself on UX, and having reinvented UX can repeatedly screw it up big time with core things, maps, email (MobileMe when that was launched). I just wonder why fix something that ain't broke and make it worse!

lispm 14y ago

The article does not really provide much new information. That mapping is hard is known. That there are companies who have much experience in this area and that Apple will have to compete with them is known - from Google, over Garmin to Nokia. It's just that it is hard and that it will take Apple a lot of time and investment to bring the mapping functionality to a better level. I'm pretty sure Apple knows that. It's just the first iteration. Apple works that way. Bring a product or service in a first iteration and then improve from there. This is how the iPod evolved, for example. Aperture, another example. The current maps application in iOS already has a feedback interface. This helps to improve the data. But there are a few things which need more consideration: * the 3d view looks ugly when looked at close to the objects. The 3d reconstruction algorithm which creates a 3d view from images is problematic. * the angle of the data from Tomtom is for car users. Other users have less benefit: there is a lack of detail and the usage perspective renders the map in a certain way. For example here in Europe there are a lot of local public transit users. They have a hard time identifying useful informations on the current maps. * combination with all kinds of POIs. You need to get that data and have it constantly updated. Where is a shop, when is it open, where is a museum, where are interesting views, where is a difficult road condition, ... Probably the mapping domain is the toughest Apple has touched in years. You need a really good idea how to deal with the challenges. Personally, I think it is worth it, but it will be a lot of work (and not of machines, but also of humans) and very expensive for Apple. I'd wish they would use more of Openstreetmap and that there would be a benefit for the Openstreetmap community.

blrgeek 14y ago
The article actually breaks down the exact lacunae in Apple's approach - it's certainly has more map domain specific insight than all the other articles on iOS6 Maps put together. And it has recommendations which are very specific and not hand-wavy. From the article 1. Completeness – Features are absent and some features that are included seem to have erroneous attributes and relationships. 2. Logical Consistency - Expecting the data across different sources to be completely consistent ie 'An example of this could be having a store’s name, street number and street name correct, but mapping it in the wrong place' 3. Positional Accuracy – is considered the closeness of a coordinate value to values accepted as being true 4. Temporal Accuracy – particularly in respect to temporal validity – are the features that they map still in existence today? 5. Thematic Accuracy – particularly in respect to non-quantitative attribute correctness and classification correctness.

emehrkay 14y ago

Maps is the only example that I can think of when compared head to head, Google makes better software. I hope people will continue to complain because it will force apple to get their shit together and put out a better product. Myapple maps experience is north compared with my Google maps , however, I haven't had any notable issues with apple amps in the Baltimore area.

netcan 14y ago
What about search?
- gurkendoktor 14y ago
  Apple has no web search so it can't be compared - I guess.

napierzaza 14y ago

It's really boring reading tech bloggers comment on hugely complex and expensive operations like mapping the entire earth. It takes a really long time, and Apple can't just throw money at it either.

btilly 14y ago

Articles like this make me suspect that http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517 was an extremely accurate description of Apple's problems. I wonder how long it will take for the outside world's expectations of Apple to drop to what they should be in the permanent absence of the gaze of Barad-dûr?

DanBC 14y ago

> I suspect that Apple does not yet understand what a headache it will be to integrate the information from these three disparate sources. This is ridiculous in the year 2012. Nothing about this should be a headache (apart from people keeping their data secret for various reasons) yet it's still bafflingly hard.

sethg 14y ago
I’ve been hip-deep in this kind of thing for years, and it really is hard. Suppose that data source A has a point for “Logan Airport” and data source B has a point (a few hundred feet away) for “General Edward Lawrence Logan International Airport” and data source C has a separate data point for every terminal.... on a case-by-case basis it’s not hard to resolve questions like this, but when you try to come up with an algorithm that scales to tens of millions of map features, you spend a lot of time scratching your head saying “why did it do THAT?!?!”

brudgers 14y ago

I've come to the conclusion that Apple is willing to bet that mediocrity in maps is not really a deal breaker in the segment of the mobile electronics market in which they operate...or rather continued mediocrity will have little effect on sales. Nobody, including Google, consistently delivers functional map data to mobile devices every time, at least not in the Atlanta metro area. I travel there with some frequency for various soccer tournaments as a referee or parent. It is not uncommon for one or another device to provide faulty routing to the people involved in a match. Sometimes it's Garmin. Sometimes it's Android. sometimes Bing. People don't primarily buy smartphones for the maps any more than people primarily buy smartphones based on call quality. Apple knows this. Apple sells phones because of iTunes and brand positioning. The issues with maps didn't even garner a comment among the Apple fans in yesterday's Facebook feed. The edge cases among iPhone users that will be lost over poor quality maps is more than offset by the Genius's sales pitch about how easy Apple's map application is to use.

bmeckel 14y ago
I don't think that's their thinking actually. I think they knew it would be near impossible to have a product at launch be as impressive as googles and they're ok with that. However, by deploying in a mandatory setting with such a large user base they can catch up to Google quickly. Who knows though, they may have legitimately overlooked it.
- brudgers 14y ago
  For years, Google has been sending fleets of specially equipped cars down countless roads in order to help verify their map data. It is impossible to imagine Apple undertaking such a massive and unsexy project as a first mover, nevermind as in an effort which would obviously be copying Google. What has changed as Apple has scaled is that they are willing to weather a PR storm.
  - bmeckel 14y ago
    I don't think street view is what made google that much better than maps. It's the search that works, and detailed maps, which were around from before street view. But I do think you're partially right on the apple front, but they do stuff that pisses people off all the time, the difference is that it's usually taking out a feature (like Ethernet) that is only beginning to be phased out by the other tech companies. The big difference is that the maps change doesn't just bother geeks, but gets at their main user base, which they're usually pretty careful about.

bloggez 14y ago

And Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.

raldi 14y ago

I'm sorry, but can someone paste the part of this article where Google announces anything about 400 years? I can't find it.

prawks 14y ago
I'm thinking it's a ploy to get people to read yet another criticism of Apple's new maps. We get it, they're bad. EDIT: Frankly, I think it's pretty hilarious this article is so long and formal.
- ImprovedSilence 14y ago
  I actually found this article to be the first one that didn't just criticize Apple, but actually made suggestions about how they should go about fixing it. It was rather interesting for someone like me who has no experience in map making, to see how much is really involved in digital cartography. edit: on a related note, I always took google maps for granted, but now that I realize how fantastic of an effort it must take to map the world to the degree they do, I have much more respect for it, and I think it is amazing in terms of "cataloging the worlds information".
  - martian 14y ago
    The Atlantic recently wrote up a nice piece on Google Maps. It explores just how complex the whole operation is, how many humans and machines are involved in making Google's maps... http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go...
    - ImprovedSilence 14y ago
      Very interesting article, thanks for the read.
    - vsl 14y ago
      That article is a bit infamous for its over-the-top advertisement value by now. See e.g. http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=394 http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=394

yock 14y ago

What is most amusing to me about this whole thing is that two weeks ago The Atlantic published[0] an article offering incredible insight into just how much effort goes into making Google's maps so good. Was it already too late at that point for Apple to see this and think that maybe they hadn't thought this thing through? The only alternatives I can think of are blindingly foolish. Either they thought they engineered their way out of a problem at which Google throws literally hundreds of people or they didn't bother to read the article in the first place. 0 - http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go...

Splines 14y ago
We don't know about what the negotiations were like between Apple and Google. Given that the Youtube app was also pulled, there's probably some political maneuverings going on. Google pretty much pulled the rug out from under Apple's feet (whether this was Google taking their ball and going home, or Apple's hubris we don't know). If Apple doesn't provide a coherent story in the next few weeks/months, this may actually have a bottom-line impact on the iPhone 5 and iOS6.
ricardobeat 14y ago
Maybe they just didn't have enough time? Google Maps has been around for 7 years (more than that pre-acquisition).
randomdata 14y ago
It seems most likely that contract negotiations broke down and Apple lost access to Google map data completely, leaving them left to replace the Maps service as quickly as possible. There is no logical reason for Apple to just walk away from a good deal just because it is Google.
Havoc 14y ago
My thoughts exactly. I remember when I read the article about the Google approach I thought...holy shit. If the _best_ Google could come up with was throwing manpower at the problem then anybody else should think really carefully about their solution if it doesn't involve similar manpower.

corporalagumbo 14y ago

I remember reading a while ago about how Apple's reliance on Google for mapping was a massive problem for the company. Something about how in the future all ad revenue will derive from location-based recommendations. If that's true, then there was no other acceptable solution for Apple than to at some point simply bite the bullet and roll out an in-house mapping service. Continuing dependence on Google here simply posed too much risk to ad revenue and indeed the basic integrity of their ecosystem. All things considered, given how complex maps must be to implement, it seems like Apple did a pretty good job for day one. Furthermore, this furore reminds me of the storm over Siri. Tech pundits work themselves into a frenzy proclaiming that Apple is losing its edge. Average consumers however pay no heed and the company rolls on to the next product launch largely unharmed. The critics miss the bigger picture: a company with so much momentum that it can easily afford to crowdsource the refinement of challenging big-data projects such as Siri and Maps. While the critics stand around prophesising doom, Apple iterates, improves, and by the time the next big hit comes out the last "disaster" is ancient history. Ignore their strength at your peril I say.

efuquen 14y ago
"Something about how in the future all ad revenue will derive from location-based recommendations" And why exactly should Apple care about this? Isn't the vast majority of their profit coming from higher then normal margins on hardware? Their bread and butter is suppose to be making compelling tech products that have high build quality and are easy to use for any type of user. Why would Apple care where ad dollars are going as long as they kept doing what they are suppose to be doing to justify their high margin devices? Apple isn't in the ad business. Of course, with their map move they've just compromised the quality of one of the core services of a mobile device, that should be a bigger deal then any of this nonsense about location based recommendations being the future of ad revenue.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  From what I understand search and ad revenue is one of Apple's revenue streams - I have no idea how large nor how to project growth. Just rehashing a vague memory. Anyway I think there are plenty of good reasons for Apple to pursue its own maps solution; eventually all technology will be fully location-gnostic, so it seems like a pretty critical technology to me. If I were Apple I wouldn't be happy leaving that in the hands of a malicious competitor either. And when you have one of the world's largest customer bases to beta-test with... why not? Seems like pulling a tooth to me - best just to get it over with quickly, and you're glad once you do. You call it compromising the quality of a core service, Apple might argue that effectively unless that service was in-house it was not adequate, so effectively never existed, and what they've done is get started on building the service they should have had a while ago.

stevewilhelm 14y ago

One solution: Apple acquires Yahoo and Nokia, or at least the Yahoo search and Nokia map teams.

snuze 14y ago

I used turn-by-turn directions yesterday and everything worked fine. I think people are blowing the whole thing way out of proportion. If Google Maps was so great, why did Google never add turn-by-turn directions to the iOS app? My guess is that they were simply holding it over Apple.

camiller 14y ago
Most of the complaints I've seen had nothing to do with turn by turn navigation. It is more about where points of interest are on the maps, airports in the wrong place etc.

terminus 14y ago

> You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing that these maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by Apple’s customers and not by Apple’s QC teams. Wasn't iOS6 in public beta for a few months?

cbs 14y ago
Public beta is apple's customers, not a QA team.

jsz0 14y ago

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Apple's Maps. It doesn't excuse the pain it will cause users in the short term but I don't see anything that is going to be a long term problem for Apple. It's now just a process of fixing errors, stocking more POI information, and working with their partners/sources to continue improving the platform. There was never going to be a point where they could make this switch gracefully.

jamesrcole 14y ago

In bigger-picture terms, Apple doing their own maps is surely a good thing because of the competition it creates. Surely it's going to end up pushing improvements in maps technology.

stcredzero 14y ago

> Perhaps the most egregious error is that Apple’s team relied on quality control by algorithm and not a process partially vetted by informed human analysis. You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing that these maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by Apple’s customers and not by Apple’s QC teams Reminds me of the days when Microsoft used to release software that customers would call "beta-quality" and wonder if they were being used as unpaid QA.

6ren 14y ago

> [if you follow] Google’s attempts at developing a quality mapping service, you will notice that they initially tried to automate the entire process and failed miserably, as Apple has. And they can improve, as Google did. But customers are very forgiving of mistakes and iteration when your product is the first and best (so far); plus, Apple's key branding is quality. > Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project This is an interesting competitive advantage Google has that is really really hard to beat. Similar to what Facebook has. But... perhaps Apple also has data? e.g. from Siri queries? They can certainly gather it now, now that their mapping app is being used.

robomartin 14y ago

The real question is: How many Apple users or would-be Apple users consider mapping to be critically important? This could be a very interesting case study on sales of an otherwise great product being hurt by a move that cripples a critically important element of said product. I've already met several people with iPhone 4's (or older) who said they are not upgrading to either iOS6 or iPhone 5 because of the mapping issue. I am part of that group as well. I'll have to buy an iPhone 5 for development purposes but I don't think I'll have it as my primary phone until the whole maps business is sorted out. Mapping seems to be one of those things that you can't design your way around. In other words, nobody cares about beautiful inaccurate maps. This could be one of the first challenges on Apples's desk that can't be solved with cute commercials and pretty design. It has to be good and at least equal to, if not better than, Google's offering. Regrettably sometimes the only way to get good at something is to start doing it. At first you'll probably suck at it but, with time and effort, you'll get better and better. This is Apple getting on that path to excelling at mapping. It'll take time. There's no doubt that they have the financial resources to make it happen. Now it is about execution.

stmartin 14y ago

Arrogance doth have a steep price. Let's hope Apple can pay for it.

zoowar 14y ago

Street View QED

josh33 14y ago

This smells like a resume to apple from someone wanting to be hired. I can't fault that, but using link bait initially to score high on HN, getting on Apple's radar makes me feel used.

tsycho 14y ago

This is probably the first time (IMHO) when the "title-change by mods" made complete sense. The old "400 years" title was pure link-bait.

lekanwang 14y ago

There was an amazing blog post (http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read... http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read...) on 41Latitude when it still around about the absolute thing of beauty and art that is the labeling and visual design of Google Maps that enable it to have extremely high data density, while maintaining perhaps the best readability of any of the interactive maps out there. Correctness is the most glaring issue, but it's far, far more that sets Google apart from what Apple launched in their maps application. EDIT: Here is an archived version found elsewhere: http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-amp-Label-Readability-Part-3 http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-am...

shanecleveland 14y ago

For all the problems there may be with Apple's maps, the directions to my house have actually improved. Google maps has recognizes a road that has been closed for about 15 years as still open, and it uses the closed road for most requesting directions to my house (and probably anyone else in my vicinity). Apple maps got it right.