4 ms·

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such a

by tghw 14y ago

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up. Google already did all of this. It's just that Apple wouldn't let them include those features on iOS. This is rather blatant lying.

dakotasmith 14y ago
I believe the we in "we wanted to provide our customers" is Apple, not Apple and Google. Hyperbolic to call it blatant lying.
- tghw 14y ago
  I believe it is blatant lying because they went out of their way to prevent their customers from having those features, even though they were readily available on other platforms through their established partner. It's also rather dishonest to say that they had to build something new from the ground up. They had other options (namely Google), which would have served their customers better.
  - wklauss 14y ago
    They had to if they considered that what Google was asking was unreasonable. For all we now Google might have asked for things Apple was not comfortable giving them, starting with user data and all the way up to co-branding.
  - jwoldan 14y ago
    Actually, from everything I've read, it appears Google refused to allow Apple to implement those features (see, for example, http://allthingsd.com/20120926/apple-google-maps-talks-crashed-over-voice-guided-directions/ http://allthingsd.com/20120926/apple-google-maps-talks-crash...). Google wanted to keep those features exclusive to Android maps.
  - dakotasmith 14y ago
    Google could have been asked to provide the same features, but there must be concessions Apple would have to give Google. These trade-offs, when evaluated by Apple, were not something that served their customers better. You can disagree with that, but it doesn't mean they are lying. And if it isn't obvious they are lying, it certainly isn't blatant. To get what they wanted without trade offs, without hidden compromise of their customers, they had to leave their partner. A partner, mind you, who had shown they will put better products (GMail app, Map app) on their own platform (I like both those apps on Android, and GMail on iOS is a joke). By building their own from the ground up, they also prevent this from happening again with another external partner who wishes to gain some leverage over the richest company in the world. I'm not apologizing for the decision, or the quality of maps. And while I love to stigmatize liars, this accusation waters down the insult of blatant lying.
  - simonh 14y ago
    Multiple independent sources have confirmed that their contract with Google prohibited Apple from implementing turn by turn. That's why Apple chose to roll their own app. If you're going to accuse someone of lying, it would be a good idea to have the facts on your side.
rmrfrmrf 14y ago
From Google Maps' terms of service: 10.2 Restrictions on the Types of Applications that You are Permitted to Build with the Maps API(s). Except as explicitly permitted in Section 8 (Licenses from Google to You) or the Maps APIs Documentation, you must not (nor may you permit anyone else to) do any of the following: (a) No "Wrapping." You must not create or offer a "wrapper" for the Service, unless you obtain Google's written consent to do so. For example, you are not permitted to: (i) use or provide any part of the Service or Content (such as map imagery, geocoding, directions, places, or terrain data) in an API that you offer to others; or (ii) create a Maps API Implementation that reimplements or duplicates Google Maps/Google Earth. For clarity, you are not "re-implementing or duplicating" Google Maps/Google Earth if your Maps API Implementation provides substantial additional features or content beyond Google Maps/Google Earth, and those additional features or content constitute the primary defining characteristic of your Maps API Implementation. (b) No Business, Residential, or Telephone Listings Services. You must not display any of the business listings Content provided by the Maps API(s) in any Maps API Implementation that has the primary purpose of making available business, residential address, or telephone directory listings. (c) No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following: (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. (ii) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of vehicle behavior; or (iii) enterprise dispatch, fleet management, business asset tracking or similar applications. If you want to engage in enterprise dispatch, fleet management, business asset tracking, or similar applications, please contact the Google Maps API for Business sales team to obtain a Google enterprise license. (If you are offering a non-enterprise implementation, you may use the Google Maps API(s) to track assets such as cars, buses or other vehicles, as long as your tracking application is made available to the public without charge. For example, you may offer a free, public Maps API Implementation that displays real-time public transit or other transportation status information.) Those features in Android's Google Maps only exist because they don't have to follow the TOS.
- revelation 14y ago
  Apple isn't exactly a random API user. Until you find written copies of the agreement between Google and Apple, don't claim any of that even applied to them.
hippee-lee 14y ago
Can you provide a citation for where Google offered turn by turn integration and voice nav to Apple but apple refused it?
arrrg 14y ago
Uhm, what? How the hell do you know that Google would have allowed them to use all of that for reasonable terms? You do not. You are just clueless.
- notimetorelax 14y ago
  I keep reading similar arguments and I wonder was there ever any piece of evidence to support it?
  - arrrg 14y ago
    There isn’t really. Neither is there for the opposite.
    - notimetorelax 14y ago
      So on the surface we have Apple very aggressively attacking everything android related. Then when they switch from Google Maps, suddenly we start speculating that maybe it all was Google's fault...
      - arrrg 14y ago
        No, not Google’s fault. Google has every right (and I mean moral as well as legal) to deny Apple access to their maps. I think there is nothing wrong with that. Yeah, it might be Google’s fault, but not in the sense of a moral fault.

by tghw 14y ago

dakotasmith 14y ago

I believe the we in "we wanted to provide our customers" is Apple, not Apple and Google. Hyperbolic to call it blatant lying.

tghw 14y ago
I believe it is blatant lying because they went out of their way to prevent their customers from having those features, even though they were readily available on other platforms through their established partner. It's also rather dishonest to say that they had to build something new from the ground up. They had other options (namely Google), which would have served their customers better.
- wklauss 14y ago
  They had to if they considered that what Google was asking was unreasonable. For all we now Google might have asked for things Apple was not comfortable giving them, starting with user data and all the way up to co-branding.
- jwoldan 14y ago
  Actually, from everything I've read, it appears Google refused to allow Apple to implement those features (see, for example, http://allthingsd.com/20120926/apple-google-maps-talks-crashed-over-voice-guided-directions/ http://allthingsd.com/20120926/apple-google-maps-talks-crash...). Google wanted to keep those features exclusive to Android maps.
- dakotasmith 14y ago
  Google could have been asked to provide the same features, but there must be concessions Apple would have to give Google. These trade-offs, when evaluated by Apple, were not something that served their customers better. You can disagree with that, but it doesn't mean they are lying. And if it isn't obvious they are lying, it certainly isn't blatant. To get what they wanted without trade offs, without hidden compromise of their customers, they had to leave their partner. A partner, mind you, who had shown they will put better products (GMail app, Map app) on their own platform (I like both those apps on Android, and GMail on iOS is a joke). By building their own from the ground up, they also prevent this from happening again with another external partner who wishes to gain some leverage over the richest company in the world. I'm not apologizing for the decision, or the quality of maps. And while I love to stigmatize liars, this accusation waters down the insult of blatant lying.
- simonh 14y ago
  Multiple independent sources have confirmed that their contract with Google prohibited Apple from implementing turn by turn. That's why Apple chose to roll their own app. If you're going to accuse someone of lying, it would be a good idea to have the facts on your side.

rmrfrmrf 14y ago

From Google Maps' terms of service: 10.2 Restrictions on the Types of Applications that You are Permitted to Build with the Maps API(s). Except as explicitly permitted in Section 8 (Licenses from Google to You) or the Maps APIs Documentation, you must not (nor may you permit anyone else to) do any of the following: (a) No "Wrapping." You must not create or offer a "wrapper" for the Service, unless you obtain Google's written consent to do so. For example, you are not permitted to: (i) use or provide any part of the Service or Content (such as map imagery, geocoding, directions, places, or terrain data) in an API that you offer to others; or (ii) create a Maps API Implementation that reimplements or duplicates Google Maps/Google Earth. For clarity, you are not "re-implementing or duplicating" Google Maps/Google Earth if your Maps API Implementation provides substantial additional features or content beyond Google Maps/Google Earth, and those additional features or content constitute the primary defining characteristic of your Maps API Implementation. (b) No Business, Residential, or Telephone Listings Services. You must not display any of the business listings Content provided by the Maps API(s) in any Maps API Implementation that has the primary purpose of making available business, residential address, or telephone directory listings. (c) No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following: (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. (ii) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of vehicle behavior; or (iii) enterprise dispatch, fleet management, business asset tracking or similar applications. If you want to engage in enterprise dispatch, fleet management, business asset tracking, or similar applications, please contact the Google Maps API for Business sales team to obtain a Google enterprise license. (If you are offering a non-enterprise implementation, you may use the Google Maps API(s) to track assets such as cars, buses or other vehicles, as long as your tracking application is made available to the public without charge. For example, you may offer a free, public Maps API Implementation that displays real-time public transit or other transportation status information.) Those features in Android's Google Maps only exist because they don't have to follow the TOS.

revelation 14y ago
Apple isn't exactly a random API user. Until you find written copies of the agreement between Google and Apple, don't claim any of that even applied to them.

hippee-lee 14y ago

Can you provide a citation for where Google offered turn by turn integration and voice nav to Apple but apple refused it?

arrrg 14y ago

Uhm, what? How the hell do you know that Google would have allowed them to use all of that for reasonable terms? You do not. You are just clueless.

notimetorelax 14y ago
I keep reading similar arguments and I wonder was there ever any piece of evidence to support it?
- arrrg 14y ago
  There isn’t really. Neither is there for the opposite.
  - notimetorelax 14y ago
    So on the surface we have Apple very aggressively attacking everything android related. Then when they switch from Google Maps, suddenly we start speculating that maybe it all was Google's fault...
    - arrrg 14y ago
      No, not Google’s fault. Google has every right (and I mean moral as well as legal) to deny Apple access to their maps. I think there is nothing wrong with that. Yeah, it might be Google’s fault, but not in the sense of a moral fault.