11 ms·

How Apple's Obsession with Google Is Hurting Apple

177 points by mhartl 14y ago

arrrg 14y ago
First, to get it out of the way: People are very right in mocking Apple. They deserve every bit of that. What they delivered with their Maps app is embarrassing. I do not want to defend that. The problem, however, is that this article assumes something to be unequivocally true even though we do not know whether it is: That Apple decided to build their own maps in order to hurt Google. It takes two to play. Both Apple and Google have to agree that Apple gets to use Google’s data – and on the conditions. That we know nothing about. We do know, however, that the old Maps app was perpetually stuck in 2007 while Android phones gained 3D views and (much more important) vector maps and turn by turn navigation. If Google refused to give that to Apple it’s perfectly understandable that Apple goes looking for alternatives. I’m not saying that’s the case. It could really be that Apple’s intention here was to hurt Google – but we cannot, as this article does, just assume that to be true. (To quote: “We all know the reason why Apple is doing these things. They’re more focused now on hurting Google than thrilling users, just like they were with Microsoft in the 90s.” – no, we do most certainly not all know that that’s the case.)
- saurik 14y ago
  We have good evidence for turn-by-turn, though: when Apple decided "ok, we cave, here's an SDK and an App Store", the contracts with developers had a weird clause saying you couldn't build a turn-by-turn application that was later changed to only that you could not build a turn-by-turn application using the data that Apple had licensed from Google; while this isn't for certain, the obvious interpretation of this is that when Apple built the iPhone they licensed Google Maps but with the clause "the iPhone cannot do turn-by-turn", which got awkward with an SDK, and later got fixed in legalese to specify "we cannot do it, but if someone else independently has data and licenses it, they can".
  - fpgeek 14y ago
    It is worth noting that Google themselves didn't offer turn-by-turn directions until Android 2.0 (October 2009). Interestingly, Google Maps Navigation launched in the US shortly after they had ditched Tele Atlas (owned by TomTom) as a US data provider. It was speculated (though not confirmed, as far as I could find) that Google ended the relationship because it was too expensive/restrictive with respect to turn-by-turn navigation. That makes me wonder if original turn-by-turn restrictions were Google's idea or a requirement of Google's existing contracts. If so, it's obvious Google decided to continue those restrictions for their own reasons and so history has repeated itself.
    - DrStalker 14y ago
      Given how much TomTom charged for their navigation app long after GPS stopped being a high cost luxury product I wouldn't be surprised if they demanded too much money from Google.
  - adnrw 14y ago
    ...the obvious interpretation of this is that when Apple built the iPhone they licensed Google Maps but with the clause "the iPhone cannot do turn-by-turn" This is from Google's Maps/Earth API TOS: 10.2 (c) No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications: (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device. - https://developers.google.com/maps/terms https://developers.google.com/maps/terms As far as I know, that clause has always been in the TOS (I looked into the licensing in 2010 and it definitely was in there then).
    - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
      While true for the average developer, I would imagine a deal brokered between bizdev teams would look drastically different than those ToS.
      - clutteredname_ 14y ago
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  I've said it elsewhere, I think this is a better explanation of the Maps fiasco than saying that Apple thought they could pull it off. We don't know of course, but we do know that Apple suing Google's OEMs has irritated Google's inner circle. So Apple can ship Google Maps without making call outs to Google's servers, and Google has implemented a payment scheme this year, recipe for reciprocity. [1] [1] Ok so generally reciprocity is mutual benefit but I couldn't resist the alliteration.
- andreyf 14y ago
  the old Maps app was perpetually stuck in 2007 while Android phones gained 3D views and (much more important) vector maps and turn by turn navigation I don't need or care about 3D view or vector maps or turn-by-turn navigation (although I see how the last one could be useful for a lot of users). I, like most city dwellers, need directions that take public transit into account. I can't believe Apple released an "upgrade" which downgrades such critical functionality.
  - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
    The whole point is they may have had no choice. Yes, it sucks, but if they don't have a contract, their choices are very limited.
    - J-H 14y ago
      Then why didn't they move to OSM or Bing Maps?
      - ankushnarula 14y ago
        They're using OSM - as for Bing, they'd be trading one headache for another. The notion that Apple is doing this to take control of a core aspect of iOS seems to make historical sense given how Apple likes integrating and controlling popular functionality into their products.
      - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
        Maybe they felt that the data wasn't sufficiently better and that they wouldn't have enough control to make that data better over time. Maybe Bing is profited from licensing the data in a way that would accomplish what Apple wants to accomplish (like the rumored ban on turn-by-turn that caused Google to drop telenav in favor of creating their own dataset). There are few times that I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in Cupertino. This is one time I wish I could have. The discussions and reasoning that went into this decision must have been fascinating because there is no way Apple was thinking, "Maybe they just won't notice". There were undoubtably a lot of tactical and strategic decisions that went into what we see, and being party to that would have given a lot of insight into Apple as a company.
- chmars 14y ago
  Apple's Google Maps app on iOS had turn-by-turn navigation, only without voice. I used it a lot and I truly miss it. I am fine with Apple developing their own maps service but they should have given a user choice.
  - josephlord 14y ago
    You had to manually advance the instructions and if you went off route you had to go back and generate a new route from current location. These are pretty fatal limitations if you are using it while driving although it worked fine for walking. As others have said without knowing the Google/Apple maps contract details we don't know if Apple could have given customers the choice.
- gnufied 14y ago
  I agree with - we do not know if Apple did what it did just to hurt Google but how about coming clean to its customers. How about saying - "Dear iPhone users, your iOS map experience might downgrade little bit in certain cities of the world after upgrading to iOS6, because Google chose not share their Map data with us. We apologize for incovenience but we are working hard to ensure our own Map coverage improves worldwide "
redthrowaway 14y ago
The historical revisionism among the Appleistas is a bit disconcerting. This is not a matter of the "suits" overruling Jobs' "pirates". Apple's current anti-Google jihad is Jobs' baby. This is what he wanted. Now, it's entirely possible that he would never have authorized iOS shipping with a broken maps application, but to suggest that Apple's current direction is anything other than his idea and his impetus is naive in the extreme.
- wklauss 14y ago
  Here we go again. Other than Jobs tantrum in his book and countless of headlines and blog post, where is this fantastic "jihad"? I see the same level of love/hate between Apple and Google than between Microsoft/Google or Google/Amazon. We just overanalyze it to disturbing extremes, but thats about it.
  - warmwaffles 14y ago
    your comment jihad needs to be reanalyzed. You are right though. Need to read less in the lines. I do believe Apple is suing to protect its best interests. There is really no other way to protect your product than through litigation.
  - batgaijin 14y ago
    Are you serious? What do you call the patent war between Samsung, HTC and every manufacturer of Android phones and Apple besides a proxy war?
    - wklauss 14y ago
      I will call it a patent war, not a jihad (I'm tired of reading religious analogies attached to technology, they are an easy trick to perform on the readers mind) And, you know, there are PLENTY of companies involved in patent wars and we don't routinely position them on the "obsessed against their competition" category. They are just litigious. In some of the examples you mention the Android manufacturers are the ones suing Apple, not the other way around. Are they "obsessed" with Apple?. Are they carrying a jihad against Cupertino, as well?
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
wklauss 14y ago
I'm afraid the obsession is not on Apple over Google but on the media and blogs over Apple and every single thing they do. Of course Apple will watch its competitor closely, especially since both are now headed in same direction. And of course they need competing services. Likewise, I'm sure that Google is watching closely every move Apple makes. But nobody in their right mind would say Google has an "obsession" with Apple. This map thing is a fun anecdote, but I'm not sure how big of a deal it really is. And yes, the maps are worse than the ones Google has develop for the past 7 years -it was to be expected- but Apple didn't have much room for movement here. If you cannot go forward on the current path, and standing still is not an option, the only possible move is take a step back and find a new route. Simple as that. Painful, sure, but it had to be done sooner or later.
- warmwaffles 14y ago
  Google maps sucked when it first came out. It will be fixed and both applications will improve. I think this is will only turn out two awesome map applications rather than just relying on google for everything.
  - joeblau 14y ago
    Really? I remember when I first used Google Maps coming from being a Map Quest user, I was blown away that I could scroll without having to refresh the page.
    - blinkingled 14y ago
      I remember something very similar - I wasn't even a Google fan then and I remember just not wanting to go back to Mapquest after having seen Google Maps.
    - snowwrestler 14y ago
      Google's interface was revolutionary, but MapQuest had deeper and more accurate data for years.
    - MatthewPhillips 14y ago
ef4 14y ago
The argument that Apple needs their own map for strategic reasons is fine, but it doesn't explain why they needed to ship it before it was any good. I can imagine three explanations: (1) They think they need to start gathering user-generated map content. "Add your business to Apple Maps if you want iPhone users to find it." (2) An internal struggle at Apple. If the supporters of the maps project thought it was at risk of getting dropped, they might have pushed it out the door to make it harder for the company to back down. (3) They didn't realize quite how bad it was. Just because customers started finding hilarious problems on days one doesn't mean they're trivially easy to find. With enough eyes, all bugs are shallow.
- andreyf 14y ago
  I think "why did they ship the new maps app before it was ready?" is the most interesting question about this whole debacle. I don't think they actually gather user-generated map content via iOS maps, so (1) doesn't make much sense to me. (2) strikes me as weird reasoning. If there's a good argument that Apple needs their own maps, enough to justify the acquisitions, it doesn't seem likely that the project would get dropped. I don't think (3) makes sense: they cut out critical functionality like public transit in directions. I don't see a reason to ship something which reduces useful features unless there was a very compelling reason. I think the most likely reason was actually pressure of some kind from Google's side.
  - ricardobeat 14y ago
    > I don't think they actually gather user-generated map content via iOS maps I've noticed my search suggestions changing from one day to another (including misspellings), so apparently Maps does have some form of crowd-sourcing built in.
    - meepmorp 14y ago
      There's a place to report errors in address information, pin placement, etc. in the maps app.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
joeblau 14y ago
I agree that the obsession against Google is hurting Apple, but I also feel that Apple is not the only company with a vendetta against Google. Twitter, Facebook, Yammer, Mozilla, and Dropbox are a few names that come to mind off of the top of my head. One thing that all of these companies have in common is that they had a product, and Google came though (or is coming) with its machine to copy/paste it as a Google product (Android, Buzz, Google+, Chrome, Google Drive). Granted--That's what Google does; They take a product like search, mail, or maps and make it a lot better. Most of what Google creates up is top notch, but I think that Google may actually be the company isolating themselves from the rest of the software development community in the long run.
- s_baby 14y ago
  Isn't Mozilla funded by Google?
  - rat87 14y ago
    Yes but Mozilla would drop google if they wanted to, they could probably get a decent chunk from microsoft for making bing search the default(I think they use Yandex as the main search provider in russia for a while). Chrome competes with firefox but mozilla has no beef with google.
  - kevhsu 14y ago
    yep.
- kumarm 14y ago
  Google Cop/Paste? Lets see: Apple -> Did not invent SmartPhone (In fact google invent smart phone since Motorola is part of Google now). Facebook -> Did not invent Social Network. Dropbox -> Did not invent File Sync. So how do you justify your copy/paste comment other than hate?
  - joeblau 14y ago
    I never claimed that any of those companies invented any of the technologies. I'm just saying that after those companies became huge successes in their respective business segments, Google came though after the incumbents with a goal to gain market share. Android did come out after iOS was huge, Google+ did come out after Facebook was huge, Drive came out after Dropbox was huge, Buzz came out after Twitter was huge, Chrome came out after Firefox was huge, and so on with Search (Altavista/Lycos/Yahoo), Flights (Kayak, Cheaptickets), Offers (Living Social,Groupon), Mail (Hotmail, Yahoo), Play (iTunes), Maps (Mapquest), Talk (AIM, ICQ) etc... None of the companies that Google copied invented their segments. It does seem that their aim to make each respective Google version of any product better they seem to piss off the incumbent companies. It's all just business and some of those endeavors that Google perused are awesome (Android, Maps, Gmail), and others aren't that great (Buzz, Google+). But in the end, all of the incumbent companies seem to get mad at Google and that's why I think that Google may be getting hurt more in the long run.
Matsta 14y ago
Ahh yes, so we are all really going to ditch Facebook and Twitter for Google+ soon? I kinda doubt it "Although Google+ may have as little as 10% of the active users of Facebook, it’s growing faster than Facebook ever did. And more importantly, Google+ has a vastly superior user experience to Facebook and has a much brighter longterm future, in my opinion."
- Gustomaximus 14y ago
  I would agree with that statement. I look at Chrome for desktop and the almost linear month on month growth for 2 years to become the most used browser, IMO largely because they have placement on Youtube/Google/Gmail pages (and of course a decent product). This growth is incredible when they don't have significant pre-installation and unsurprisingly shows the power of having web presence. Here is Chromes forward march: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201001-201208 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201001-201208 But back to G+, over the short term (1 year) I see G+ getting some traction in the professional environmental, much likes Facebook's college crowd. Longer term (3 years) Google will use their massive presence across the search home page, Youtube, Android, Maps, Gmail and probably books/movies/music to sign people up bit by bit until they reach a critical mass where you may as well use G+ rather than Facebook from a reach perspective. Then you have the tipping point where a few features make the choice difference. And I back Google to innovate killer features and build brand preference over Facebook.
- microtherion 14y ago
  Apart from the merits of Google+ per se, are there any data on how it's doing on mobile? My impression is that on mobile, shorter form media tend to do better, so Twitter's rise seems to be correlated with smartphone adoption, while Facebook is not quite as popular on phones. From anything I've seen with Google+, its culture tends to be much longer form than Facebook (In fact, I pretty much gave up on reading it because it's such a Pontification Platform that I found it to be too wordy even for the desktop). Are there really people who find Google+ a great experience on Smartphones?
milesskorpen 14y ago
This article makes a legitimate point about the maps application. But I don't get the strange tangent on Google+ — why would anyone expect Apple to anoint the social network of a competitor which isn't even that popular?
- fl3tch 14y ago
  It should be noted that Mike Elgan is a prolific user and advocate of G+ with a big following. https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts
  - NZ_Matt 14y ago
    The only people advocating G+ are tech journalists that have a strong following and like to market their websites on it. It just doesn't have a lot of utility for the average folk who primarily want to engage with their friends and family.
- ankushnarula 14y ago
  Yeah - to call Google+ the Google Maps of social networking is like calling Smalltalk the Facebook of OOP.
  - philwelch 14y ago
    Is that a nested analogy?
SoftwareMaven 14y ago
How do we know this is Apple trying to hurt Google? How do we know this isn't Google trying to hurt Apple? The fact that this sucks so bad for Apple's users and seems to be a net positive for Google would seem to indicate it is likely to be otherwise. The fact that Apple extolled the virtues of its map is immaterial. Of course they are going to do that.
- josephcooney 14y ago
  How does google force Apple to ship broken software again? I've forgotten....
  - meepmorp 14y ago
    By refusing to grant them a license to their map data in iOS 6? or placing such demands and restrictions on the license that it's preferable to Apple to just go with what they have?
    - josephcooney 14y ago
      Apple had the choice of shipping nothing at all, or licencing map data from someone else.
      - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
        The "license other" has been covered elsewhere, but do you really believe the current solution is more of a problem for Apple than no maps would have been?
        josephcooney 14y ago
        No, but they still had a choice.
  - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
    Who provided the data for the "Maps" app prior to iOS 6 again? I've forgotten... An alternative would be no maps, but as bad as the new maps app is, it is clearly better than no maps. Another option might be licensing somebody else's maps, but we don't know that they didn't try and fail to find somebody willing or find some somebody willing but with, on balance, no better data than Apple currently has (or slightly better but at the cost of another long-term deal that keeps them from controlling this critical part of their platform). Maybe Apple really did do this out of hubris alone, but, as arrogant as they are, I find that explanation to be the one that requires the most suspension of disbelief.
Xcelerate 14y ago
I hardly got to the article because I couldn't quit laughing at the image at the top! Apparently that was an old painting that an 80 year old woman "restored": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecce_Homo_(El%C3%ADas_Garc%C3%ADa_Mart%C3%ADnez) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecce_Homo_(El%C3%ADas_Garc%C3%A... It's a very interesting story in and of itself.
- Xcelerate 14y ago
  Seriously? I found the story to be intellectually stimulating. There's a lot in the news about how the new version can be an interpretation of both secular and sacred themes. I hardly consider my comment un-hacker-news worthy.
yalogin 14y ago
From the last 10 years its very safe to assume that Apple would never ship anything like this if they are not forced to. I would bet that its Google that wanted to do this more than Apple. I do not doubt that Apple wanted to move away from Google maps but I highly doubt they wanted to do it with iOS6. This is article is ridiculous to assume that. Really bad.
manojlds 14y ago
I stopped reading when it compared Google+ to Google Maps. Really? By the author's own measure, Google+ is the result of Google's obsession with Facebook.
Corrado 14y ago
I think a lot of people are missing the point of the article. My take on it is that Apple is, again, losing it's way and the article points out some specific examples. Things like maps and Facebook integration are just the icing on the cake. I just can't shake the feeling that Apple doesn't care about the customer anymore. With every new OS release Apple has moved toward homogenization of their product line. Soon there will be no difference between what's on your desktop and in your pocket, and I think this is a bad thing. Apple's main strength has always been its ability to attract "makers", however with this new direction I see them turning their back on developers, artists, writers, etc. Maybe that's a valid market and a good long term vision and if so then good for them. However, for the first time in years I am looking for other alternatives for my future computing devices. And that makes me sad. I've really, really enjoyed (most of) their products over the last 20 years, but I guess like any other company, Apple has run out of steam.
angelortega 14y ago
Upvoted, if only for the "infographic" on Google vs Apple Maps. LOL!
pilif 14y ago
To be fair though: we could just as well be seeing the results of a contract expiring which to renew Google might have asked for unreasonable terms. Think of it: the iPhone came out 5 years ago and 5 years is a conceivable contract term, just as it was 5 years for the YouTube app. When the maps app was initially put on the phone, Google maps was more or less free. Nowadays it is very expensive (a bit better now, but still too expensive for many services out there). Surely not too expensive for Apple, but still. The best way for apple would probably have been to extend the contract for another year or two to improve their maps service which they are clearly working on for two to three years already. But maybe it is Google that didn't want that. Maybe they outright refused, wanted to only do it at 10 times the original price for another 5 years or longer, or they might have wanted a patent agreement to stop the witch hunt against android. We just don't know, but the reason for crappy maps could just as well have been Google. Or as I use to say: why can't they just get along? It would be so much better for the consumer they both seem to put first in their pitches.
- Tichy 14y ago
  This is already becoming a new stab-in-the-back legend: it's not Apple's fault, it is Google's fault. That seems very unlikely to me, but I guess it will just end how it always ends. Apple fans will keep believing it was Google's fault, Google fans will keep believing it was Apple's fault. (Disclaimer: I am a Google fan). Also, I wonder if Google really was the only player who could provide a maps app? What about Microsoft/Bing, or Nokia? Nobody wanted to play nice with Apple? And why not?
- gurkendoktor 14y ago
  > Think of it: the iPhone came out 5 years ago and 5 years is a conceivable contract term, just as it was 5 years for the YouTube app. Would that explain why iOS 5.1.1 was never patched to fix the jailbreak?
- atlbeer 14y ago
  This was my first assumption as to why Apple had to remove Google Maps / YouTube from iOS. They had a licensing agreement, it expired and Google saw a way to exact some leverage against Apple and the iOS ecosystem. The only thing to keep me from 100% thinking that is why hasn't Apple said anything? They had to have known iOS6 maps and the removal of YouTube would at minimum play bad in the press on top of the user experience. Why not change the lead story. The headlines would have changed the tone from "dumb-Apple" to "evil-Google" in a heartbeat. Apple hasn't even hinted at this yet.
corporalagumbo 14y ago
I cannot believe I hadn't heard or realised that the Youtube app had been removed! That's insane! Is this common knowledge or has it gone under the radar?
- yskchu 14y ago
  There's a Youtube app in the app store now, it's pretty good, check it out. I like how you can read comments while watching the clip, you couldn't do that before.
ralfd 14y ago
Linking to cultofmac with this sensationalized headline? For a moment I thought I was on reddit instead of hn. http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/10/21/cult-of-mac http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/10/21/cult-of-mac
kamaal 14y ago
Apple is no way positioned to harm Google in any way on the longer run. In many ways Apple's products are like what video games, music albums and stereos were in the past. They are products with massive hype, craze and cult following of some kind. Google on the other hand is a massive Innovation factory, churning innovations by the years. No body really is close to them when it comes to search, on line advertising etc. On top of that they have some of the top most properties on the internet- Mail, News, G+ etc etc. What you are seeing now is Google really flooding market with their other innovative stuff Google TV, Android, wearable computing, self driving cars, offering peta byte scale data analytic engines etc. Engineering innovation is awesome too. Apple cannot compete with that sort of company. Their best bet is to assume that their cult following will remain and will go gaga every time they come with a new product.
- microtherion 14y ago
  Google on the other hand is a massive Innovation factory, churning innovations by the years. No body really is close to them when it comes to search, on line advertising etc. I'm wondering a bit about search. The few times I've bothered to use e.g. Bing, I wouldn't say the search quality was noticeably worse, and the emphasis on organic over paid links was... refreshing. When I think back about my search engine switches in the past, they rarely happened because of search algorithm quality per se, but mostly because the previous search engine was getting clogged with ads. That definitely drove me away from lycos, and I seem to remember it also happened with AltaVista. Google may be unrivaled in online advertising, but to me as a consumer, that is not necessarily a benefit.
- josephlord 14y ago
  Apple may not be positioned to harm Google massively but I don't see that is really their aim. Google clearly has done and still does some real useful innovation but I think that you are massively overstating their effectiveness on that front. What is innovative about Google TV? The first version was a shit concept implemented badly and advertised by lunatics. I understand the second version is better but I still don't think the concept is right (I've not used the second version so it may be quite good now). Android? I'm not saying that it isn't good or doesn't have some innovations but it isn't in a different class to iOS or even probably WinPhone. Can you explain what is really innovative about it. Wearable computing - toy so far. Do I think that it will be turned into a mass market product in the next 5 years. My bet is no. Also IF Apple was working on such a thing they wouldn't tell the world until it was consumer ready so there isn't necessarily a lead. On line advertising, peta byte scale data analytics - these are tools used against me as a customer (or am I the product). They are the reasons that I don't use Gmail or want an Android phone. Do I trust Google more than FB - hell yes! But they know too much already from my search patterns, maps use etc. I don't want to give them any more. I could go down the rest of your list but it would get tedious. It also seems to me that cult going gaga these days isn't the Apple one but the Google one. There is far more vitriol, anger and negative comments about Apple products than raving praise for them. Your post is not in that category but it shows what I perceive as an unhealthy level of reverence to Google.
0ack 14y ago
Sort of like how Google's obsession with Facebook is hurting Google?
tmh88j 14y ago
I agreed with everything up until the strange digression into Google+. I understand why he brought it up, but why go into irrelevant details about it? While we're on the subject of G+... >And more importantly, Google+ has a vastly superior user experience to Facebook Really? Am I the only one who can't seem to figure out G+ at all? I use it almost daily for hangouts, but navigation is unbearable. The lack of labels and use of icons we're supposed to know is irritating. Good luck joining a hangout that's in progress unless you're invited. G+ may appear to be more clean and chic on the surface, but when navigation and functionality are an issue none of that matters.
Flenser 14y ago
The company has also gotten into bed with both Twitter and Facebook on social networking, and doesn’t offer any out-of-the-box integration with Google+. Twitter integration makes sense for Apple. But Facebook integration does not, as I explained in June. They are attacking Facebook too. The new social features for photos are a clear shot at Facebook as photo sharing drives much of Facebook's network effect. That's probably also why Facebook are getting in the phone business, as Apple are one of the biggest makers of cameras.

177 points by mhartl 14y ago

arrrg 14y ago

First, to get it out of the way: People are very right in mocking Apple. They deserve every bit of that. What they delivered with their Maps app is embarrassing. I do not want to defend that. The problem, however, is that this article assumes something to be unequivocally true even though we do not know whether it is: That Apple decided to build their own maps in order to hurt Google. It takes two to play. Both Apple and Google have to agree that Apple gets to use Google’s data – and on the conditions. That we know nothing about. We do know, however, that the old Maps app was perpetually stuck in 2007 while Android phones gained 3D views and (much more important) vector maps and turn by turn navigation. If Google refused to give that to Apple it’s perfectly understandable that Apple goes looking for alternatives. I’m not saying that’s the case. It could really be that Apple’s intention here was to hurt Google – but we cannot, as this article does, just assume that to be true. (To quote: “We all know the reason why Apple is doing these things. They’re more focused now on hurting Google than thrilling users, just like they were with Microsoft in the 90s.” – no, we do most certainly not all know that that’s the case.)

saurik 14y ago
We have good evidence for turn-by-turn, though: when Apple decided "ok, we cave, here's an SDK and an App Store", the contracts with developers had a weird clause saying you couldn't build a turn-by-turn application that was later changed to only that you could not build a turn-by-turn application using the data that Apple had licensed from Google; while this isn't for certain, the obvious interpretation of this is that when Apple built the iPhone they licensed Google Maps but with the clause "the iPhone cannot do turn-by-turn", which got awkward with an SDK, and later got fixed in legalese to specify "we cannot do it, but if someone else independently has data and licenses it, they can".
- fpgeek 14y ago
  It is worth noting that Google themselves didn't offer turn-by-turn directions until Android 2.0 (October 2009). Interestingly, Google Maps Navigation launched in the US shortly after they had ditched Tele Atlas (owned by TomTom) as a US data provider. It was speculated (though not confirmed, as far as I could find) that Google ended the relationship because it was too expensive/restrictive with respect to turn-by-turn navigation. That makes me wonder if original turn-by-turn restrictions were Google's idea or a requirement of Google's existing contracts. If so, it's obvious Google decided to continue those restrictions for their own reasons and so history has repeated itself.
  - DrStalker 14y ago
    Given how much TomTom charged for their navigation app long after GPS stopped being a high cost luxury product I wouldn't be surprised if they demanded too much money from Google.
- adnrw 14y ago
  ...the obvious interpretation of this is that when Apple built the iPhone they licensed Google Maps but with the clause "the iPhone cannot do turn-by-turn" This is from Google's Maps/Earth API TOS: 10.2 (c) No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications: (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device. - https://developers.google.com/maps/terms https://developers.google.com/maps/terms As far as I know, that clause has always been in the TOS (I looked into the licensing in 2010 and it definitely was in there then).
  - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
    While true for the average developer, I would imagine a deal brokered between bizdev teams would look drastically different than those ToS.
    - clutteredname_ 14y ago
ChuckMcM 14y ago
I've said it elsewhere, I think this is a better explanation of the Maps fiasco than saying that Apple thought they could pull it off. We don't know of course, but we do know that Apple suing Google's OEMs has irritated Google's inner circle. So Apple can ship Google Maps without making call outs to Google's servers, and Google has implemented a payment scheme this year, recipe for reciprocity. [1] [1] Ok so generally reciprocity is mutual benefit but I couldn't resist the alliteration.
andreyf 14y ago
the old Maps app was perpetually stuck in 2007 while Android phones gained 3D views and (much more important) vector maps and turn by turn navigation I don't need or care about 3D view or vector maps or turn-by-turn navigation (although I see how the last one could be useful for a lot of users). I, like most city dwellers, need directions that take public transit into account. I can't believe Apple released an "upgrade" which downgrades such critical functionality.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  The whole point is they may have had no choice. Yes, it sucks, but if they don't have a contract, their choices are very limited.
  - J-H 14y ago
    Then why didn't they move to OSM or Bing Maps?
    - ankushnarula 14y ago
      They're using OSM - as for Bing, they'd be trading one headache for another. The notion that Apple is doing this to take control of a core aspect of iOS seems to make historical sense given how Apple likes integrating and controlling popular functionality into their products.
    - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
      Maybe they felt that the data wasn't sufficiently better and that they wouldn't have enough control to make that data better over time. Maybe Bing is profited from licensing the data in a way that would accomplish what Apple wants to accomplish (like the rumored ban on turn-by-turn that caused Google to drop telenav in favor of creating their own dataset). There are few times that I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in Cupertino. This is one time I wish I could have. The discussions and reasoning that went into this decision must have been fascinating because there is no way Apple was thinking, "Maybe they just won't notice". There were undoubtably a lot of tactical and strategic decisions that went into what we see, and being party to that would have given a lot of insight into Apple as a company.
chmars 14y ago
Apple's Google Maps app on iOS had turn-by-turn navigation, only without voice. I used it a lot and I truly miss it. I am fine with Apple developing their own maps service but they should have given a user choice.
- josephlord 14y ago
  You had to manually advance the instructions and if you went off route you had to go back and generate a new route from current location. These are pretty fatal limitations if you are using it while driving although it worked fine for walking. As others have said without knowing the Google/Apple maps contract details we don't know if Apple could have given customers the choice.
gnufied 14y ago
I agree with - we do not know if Apple did what it did just to hurt Google but how about coming clean to its customers. How about saying - "Dear iPhone users, your iOS map experience might downgrade little bit in certain cities of the world after upgrading to iOS6, because Google chose not share their Map data with us. We apologize for incovenience but we are working hard to ensure our own Map coverage improves worldwide "

redthrowaway 14y ago

The historical revisionism among the Appleistas is a bit disconcerting. This is not a matter of the "suits" overruling Jobs' "pirates". Apple's current anti-Google jihad is Jobs' baby. This is what he wanted. Now, it's entirely possible that he would never have authorized iOS shipping with a broken maps application, but to suggest that Apple's current direction is anything other than his idea and his impetus is naive in the extreme.

wklauss 14y ago
Here we go again. Other than Jobs tantrum in his book and countless of headlines and blog post, where is this fantastic "jihad"? I see the same level of love/hate between Apple and Google than between Microsoft/Google or Google/Amazon. We just overanalyze it to disturbing extremes, but thats about it.
- warmwaffles 14y ago
  your comment jihad needs to be reanalyzed. You are right though. Need to read less in the lines. I do believe Apple is suing to protect its best interests. There is really no other way to protect your product than through litigation.
- batgaijin 14y ago
  Are you serious? What do you call the patent war between Samsung, HTC and every manufacturer of Android phones and Apple besides a proxy war?
  - wklauss 14y ago
    I will call it a patent war, not a jihad (I'm tired of reading religious analogies attached to technology, they are an easy trick to perform on the readers mind) And, you know, there are PLENTY of companies involved in patent wars and we don't routinely position them on the "obsessed against their competition" category. They are just litigious. In some of the examples you mention the Android manufacturers are the ones suing Apple, not the other way around. Are they "obsessed" with Apple?. Are they carrying a jihad against Cupertino, as well?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

wklauss 14y ago

I'm afraid the obsession is not on Apple over Google but on the media and blogs over Apple and every single thing they do. Of course Apple will watch its competitor closely, especially since both are now headed in same direction. And of course they need competing services. Likewise, I'm sure that Google is watching closely every move Apple makes. But nobody in their right mind would say Google has an "obsession" with Apple. This map thing is a fun anecdote, but I'm not sure how big of a deal it really is. And yes, the maps are worse than the ones Google has develop for the past 7 years -it was to be expected- but Apple didn't have much room for movement here. If you cannot go forward on the current path, and standing still is not an option, the only possible move is take a step back and find a new route. Simple as that. Painful, sure, but it had to be done sooner or later.

warmwaffles 14y ago
Google maps sucked when it first came out. It will be fixed and both applications will improve. I think this is will only turn out two awesome map applications rather than just relying on google for everything.
- joeblau 14y ago
  Really? I remember when I first used Google Maps coming from being a Map Quest user, I was blown away that I could scroll without having to refresh the page.
  - blinkingled 14y ago
    I remember something very similar - I wasn't even a Google fan then and I remember just not wanting to go back to Mapquest after having seen Google Maps.
  - snowwrestler 14y ago
    Google's interface was revolutionary, but MapQuest had deeper and more accurate data for years.
  - MatthewPhillips 14y ago

ef4 14y ago

The argument that Apple needs their own map for strategic reasons is fine, but it doesn't explain why they needed to ship it before it was any good. I can imagine three explanations: (1) They think they need to start gathering user-generated map content. "Add your business to Apple Maps if you want iPhone users to find it." (2) An internal struggle at Apple. If the supporters of the maps project thought it was at risk of getting dropped, they might have pushed it out the door to make it harder for the company to back down. (3) They didn't realize quite how bad it was. Just because customers started finding hilarious problems on days one doesn't mean they're trivially easy to find. With enough eyes, all bugs are shallow.

andreyf 14y ago
I think "why did they ship the new maps app before it was ready?" is the most interesting question about this whole debacle. I don't think they actually gather user-generated map content via iOS maps, so (1) doesn't make much sense to me. (2) strikes me as weird reasoning. If there's a good argument that Apple needs their own maps, enough to justify the acquisitions, it doesn't seem likely that the project would get dropped. I don't think (3) makes sense: they cut out critical functionality like public transit in directions. I don't see a reason to ship something which reduces useful features unless there was a very compelling reason. I think the most likely reason was actually pressure of some kind from Google's side.
- ricardobeat 14y ago
  > I don't think they actually gather user-generated map content via iOS maps I've noticed my search suggestions changing from one day to another (including misspellings), so apparently Maps does have some form of crowd-sourcing built in.
  - meepmorp 14y ago
    There's a place to report errors in address information, pin placement, etc. in the maps app.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago

joeblau 14y ago

I agree that the obsession against Google is hurting Apple, but I also feel that Apple is not the only company with a vendetta against Google. Twitter, Facebook, Yammer, Mozilla, and Dropbox are a few names that come to mind off of the top of my head. One thing that all of these companies have in common is that they had a product, and Google came though (or is coming) with its machine to copy/paste it as a Google product (Android, Buzz, Google+, Chrome, Google Drive). Granted--That's what Google does; They take a product like search, mail, or maps and make it a lot better. Most of what Google creates up is top notch, but I think that Google may actually be the company isolating themselves from the rest of the software development community in the long run.

s_baby 14y ago
Isn't Mozilla funded by Google?
- rat87 14y ago
  Yes but Mozilla would drop google if they wanted to, they could probably get a decent chunk from microsoft for making bing search the default(I think they use Yandex as the main search provider in russia for a while). Chrome competes with firefox but mozilla has no beef with google.
- kevhsu 14y ago
  yep.
kumarm 14y ago
Google Cop/Paste? Lets see: Apple -> Did not invent SmartPhone (In fact google invent smart phone since Motorola is part of Google now). Facebook -> Did not invent Social Network. Dropbox -> Did not invent File Sync. So how do you justify your copy/paste comment other than hate?
- joeblau 14y ago
  I never claimed that any of those companies invented any of the technologies. I'm just saying that after those companies became huge successes in their respective business segments, Google came though after the incumbents with a goal to gain market share. Android did come out after iOS was huge, Google+ did come out after Facebook was huge, Drive came out after Dropbox was huge, Buzz came out after Twitter was huge, Chrome came out after Firefox was huge, and so on with Search (Altavista/Lycos/Yahoo), Flights (Kayak, Cheaptickets), Offers (Living Social,Groupon), Mail (Hotmail, Yahoo), Play (iTunes), Maps (Mapquest), Talk (AIM, ICQ) etc... None of the companies that Google copied invented their segments. It does seem that their aim to make each respective Google version of any product better they seem to piss off the incumbent companies. It's all just business and some of those endeavors that Google perused are awesome (Android, Maps, Gmail), and others aren't that great (Buzz, Google+). But in the end, all of the incumbent companies seem to get mad at Google and that's why I think that Google may be getting hurt more in the long run.

Matsta 14y ago

Ahh yes, so we are all really going to ditch Facebook and Twitter for Google+ soon? I kinda doubt it "Although Google+ may have as little as 10% of the active users of Facebook, it’s growing faster than Facebook ever did. And more importantly, Google+ has a vastly superior user experience to Facebook and has a much brighter longterm future, in my opinion."

Gustomaximus 14y ago
I would agree with that statement. I look at Chrome for desktop and the almost linear month on month growth for 2 years to become the most used browser, IMO largely because they have placement on Youtube/Google/Gmail pages (and of course a decent product). This growth is incredible when they don't have significant pre-installation and unsurprisingly shows the power of having web presence. Here is Chromes forward march: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201001-201208 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201001-201208 But back to G+, over the short term (1 year) I see G+ getting some traction in the professional environmental, much likes Facebook's college crowd. Longer term (3 years) Google will use their massive presence across the search home page, Youtube, Android, Maps, Gmail and probably books/movies/music to sign people up bit by bit until they reach a critical mass where you may as well use G+ rather than Facebook from a reach perspective. Then you have the tipping point where a few features make the choice difference. And I back Google to innovate killer features and build brand preference over Facebook.
microtherion 14y ago
Apart from the merits of Google+ per se, are there any data on how it's doing on mobile? My impression is that on mobile, shorter form media tend to do better, so Twitter's rise seems to be correlated with smartphone adoption, while Facebook is not quite as popular on phones. From anything I've seen with Google+, its culture tends to be much longer form than Facebook (In fact, I pretty much gave up on reading it because it's such a Pontification Platform that I found it to be too wordy even for the desktop). Are there really people who find Google+ a great experience on Smartphones?

milesskorpen 14y ago

This article makes a legitimate point about the maps application. But I don't get the strange tangent on Google+ — why would anyone expect Apple to anoint the social network of a competitor which isn't even that popular?

fl3tch 14y ago
It should be noted that Mike Elgan is a prolific user and advocate of G+ with a big following. https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts
- NZ_Matt 14y ago
  The only people advocating G+ are tech journalists that have a strong following and like to market their websites on it. It just doesn't have a lot of utility for the average folk who primarily want to engage with their friends and family.
ankushnarula 14y ago
Yeah - to call Google+ the Google Maps of social networking is like calling Smalltalk the Facebook of OOP.
- philwelch 14y ago
  Is that a nested analogy?

SoftwareMaven 14y ago

How do we know this is Apple trying to hurt Google? How do we know this isn't Google trying to hurt Apple? The fact that this sucks so bad for Apple's users and seems to be a net positive for Google would seem to indicate it is likely to be otherwise. The fact that Apple extolled the virtues of its map is immaterial. Of course they are going to do that.

josephcooney 14y ago
How does google force Apple to ship broken software again? I've forgotten....
- meepmorp 14y ago
  By refusing to grant them a license to their map data in iOS 6? or placing such demands and restrictions on the license that it's preferable to Apple to just go with what they have?
  - josephcooney 14y ago
    Apple had the choice of shipping nothing at all, or licencing map data from someone else.
    - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
      The "license other" has been covered elsewhere, but do you really believe the current solution is more of a problem for Apple than no maps would have been?
      - josephcooney 14y ago
        No, but they still had a choice.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  Who provided the data for the "Maps" app prior to iOS 6 again? I've forgotten... An alternative would be no maps, but as bad as the new maps app is, it is clearly better than no maps. Another option might be licensing somebody else's maps, but we don't know that they didn't try and fail to find somebody willing or find some somebody willing but with, on balance, no better data than Apple currently has (or slightly better but at the cost of another long-term deal that keeps them from controlling this critical part of their platform). Maybe Apple really did do this out of hubris alone, but, as arrogant as they are, I find that explanation to be the one that requires the most suspension of disbelief.

Xcelerate 14y ago

I hardly got to the article because I couldn't quit laughing at the image at the top! Apparently that was an old painting that an 80 year old woman "restored": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecce_Homo_(El%C3%ADas_Garc%C3%ADa_Mart%C3%ADnez) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecce_Homo_(El%C3%ADas_Garc%C3%A... It's a very interesting story in and of itself.

Xcelerate 14y ago
Seriously? I found the story to be intellectually stimulating. There's a lot in the news about how the new version can be an interpretation of both secular and sacred themes. I hardly consider my comment un-hacker-news worthy.

yalogin 14y ago

From the last 10 years its very safe to assume that Apple would never ship anything like this if they are not forced to. I would bet that its Google that wanted to do this more than Apple. I do not doubt that Apple wanted to move away from Google maps but I highly doubt they wanted to do it with iOS6. This is article is ridiculous to assume that. Really bad.

manojlds 14y ago

I stopped reading when it compared Google+ to Google Maps. Really? By the author's own measure, Google+ is the result of Google's obsession with Facebook.

Corrado 14y ago

I think a lot of people are missing the point of the article. My take on it is that Apple is, again, losing it's way and the article points out some specific examples. Things like maps and Facebook integration are just the icing on the cake. I just can't shake the feeling that Apple doesn't care about the customer anymore. With every new OS release Apple has moved toward homogenization of their product line. Soon there will be no difference between what's on your desktop and in your pocket, and I think this is a bad thing. Apple's main strength has always been its ability to attract "makers", however with this new direction I see them turning their back on developers, artists, writers, etc. Maybe that's a valid market and a good long term vision and if so then good for them. However, for the first time in years I am looking for other alternatives for my future computing devices. And that makes me sad. I've really, really enjoyed (most of) their products over the last 20 years, but I guess like any other company, Apple has run out of steam.

angelortega 14y ago

Upvoted, if only for the "infographic" on Google vs Apple Maps. LOL!

pilif 14y ago

To be fair though: we could just as well be seeing the results of a contract expiring which to renew Google might have asked for unreasonable terms. Think of it: the iPhone came out 5 years ago and 5 years is a conceivable contract term, just as it was 5 years for the YouTube app. When the maps app was initially put on the phone, Google maps was more or less free. Nowadays it is very expensive (a bit better now, but still too expensive for many services out there). Surely not too expensive for Apple, but still. The best way for apple would probably have been to extend the contract for another year or two to improve their maps service which they are clearly working on for two to three years already. But maybe it is Google that didn't want that. Maybe they outright refused, wanted to only do it at 10 times the original price for another 5 years or longer, or they might have wanted a patent agreement to stop the witch hunt against android. We just don't know, but the reason for crappy maps could just as well have been Google. Or as I use to say: why can't they just get along? It would be so much better for the consumer they both seem to put first in their pitches.

Tichy 14y ago
This is already becoming a new stab-in-the-back legend: it's not Apple's fault, it is Google's fault. That seems very unlikely to me, but I guess it will just end how it always ends. Apple fans will keep believing it was Google's fault, Google fans will keep believing it was Apple's fault. (Disclaimer: I am a Google fan). Also, I wonder if Google really was the only player who could provide a maps app? What about Microsoft/Bing, or Nokia? Nobody wanted to play nice with Apple? And why not?
gurkendoktor 14y ago
> Think of it: the iPhone came out 5 years ago and 5 years is a conceivable contract term, just as it was 5 years for the YouTube app. Would that explain why iOS 5.1.1 was never patched to fix the jailbreak?
atlbeer 14y ago
This was my first assumption as to why Apple had to remove Google Maps / YouTube from iOS. They had a licensing agreement, it expired and Google saw a way to exact some leverage against Apple and the iOS ecosystem. The only thing to keep me from 100% thinking that is why hasn't Apple said anything? They had to have known iOS6 maps and the removal of YouTube would at minimum play bad in the press on top of the user experience. Why not change the lead story. The headlines would have changed the tone from "dumb-Apple" to "evil-Google" in a heartbeat. Apple hasn't even hinted at this yet.

corporalagumbo 14y ago

I cannot believe I hadn't heard or realised that the Youtube app had been removed! That's insane! Is this common knowledge or has it gone under the radar?

yskchu 14y ago
There's a Youtube app in the app store now, it's pretty good, check it out. I like how you can read comments while watching the clip, you couldn't do that before.

ralfd 14y ago

Linking to cultofmac with this sensationalized headline? For a moment I thought I was on reddit instead of hn. http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/10/21/cult-of-mac http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/10/21/cult-of-mac

kamaal 14y ago

Apple is no way positioned to harm Google in any way on the longer run. In many ways Apple's products are like what video games, music albums and stereos were in the past. They are products with massive hype, craze and cult following of some kind. Google on the other hand is a massive Innovation factory, churning innovations by the years. No body really is close to them when it comes to search, on line advertising etc. On top of that they have some of the top most properties on the internet- Mail, News, G+ etc etc. What you are seeing now is Google really flooding market with their other innovative stuff Google TV, Android, wearable computing, self driving cars, offering peta byte scale data analytic engines etc. Engineering innovation is awesome too. Apple cannot compete with that sort of company. Their best bet is to assume that their cult following will remain and will go gaga every time they come with a new product.

microtherion 14y ago
Google on the other hand is a massive Innovation factory, churning innovations by the years. No body really is close to them when it comes to search, on line advertising etc. I'm wondering a bit about search. The few times I've bothered to use e.g. Bing, I wouldn't say the search quality was noticeably worse, and the emphasis on organic over paid links was... refreshing. When I think back about my search engine switches in the past, they rarely happened because of search algorithm quality per se, but mostly because the previous search engine was getting clogged with ads. That definitely drove me away from lycos, and I seem to remember it also happened with AltaVista. Google may be unrivaled in online advertising, but to me as a consumer, that is not necessarily a benefit.
josephlord 14y ago
Apple may not be positioned to harm Google massively but I don't see that is really their aim. Google clearly has done and still does some real useful innovation but I think that you are massively overstating their effectiveness on that front. What is innovative about Google TV? The first version was a shit concept implemented badly and advertised by lunatics. I understand the second version is better but I still don't think the concept is right (I've not used the second version so it may be quite good now). Android? I'm not saying that it isn't good or doesn't have some innovations but it isn't in a different class to iOS or even probably WinPhone. Can you explain what is really innovative about it. Wearable computing - toy so far. Do I think that it will be turned into a mass market product in the next 5 years. My bet is no. Also IF Apple was working on such a thing they wouldn't tell the world until it was consumer ready so there isn't necessarily a lead. On line advertising, peta byte scale data analytics - these are tools used against me as a customer (or am I the product). They are the reasons that I don't use Gmail or want an Android phone. Do I trust Google more than FB - hell yes! But they know too much already from my search patterns, maps use etc. I don't want to give them any more. I could go down the rest of your list but it would get tedious. It also seems to me that cult going gaga these days isn't the Apple one but the Google one. There is far more vitriol, anger and negative comments about Apple products than raving praise for them. Your post is not in that category but it shows what I perceive as an unhealthy level of reverence to Google.

0ack 14y ago

Sort of like how Google's obsession with Facebook is hurting Google?

tmh88j 14y ago

I agreed with everything up until the strange digression into Google+. I understand why he brought it up, but why go into irrelevant details about it? While we're on the subject of G+... >And more importantly, Google+ has a vastly superior user experience to Facebook Really? Am I the only one who can't seem to figure out G+ at all? I use it almost daily for hangouts, but navigation is unbearable. The lack of labels and use of icons we're supposed to know is irritating. Good luck joining a hangout that's in progress unless you're invited. G+ may appear to be more clean and chic on the surface, but when navigation and functionality are an issue none of that matters.

Flenser 14y ago

The company has also gotten into bed with both Twitter and Facebook on social networking, and doesn’t offer any out-of-the-box integration with Google+. Twitter integration makes sense for Apple. But Facebook integration does not, as I explained in June. They are attacking Facebook too. The new social features for photos are a clear shot at Facebook as photo sharing drives much of Facebook's network effect. That's probably also why Facebook are getting in the phone business, as Apple are one of the biggest makers of cameras.